Are there any disadvantages to using AWS Amplify to host SPAs compared to CodePipeline?

user_11313801 0
Viewed 2341

At home, I use AWS Amplify to host my personal portfolio website since it is so easy and cheap to host. At work, they have me making other SPAs (in vue.js) and putting the code in private GitHub repos, but I have to host the websites on EC2 instances and push the code using AWS CodeDeploy/CodePipeline.

Using EC2s to do this is so much more expensive (Amplify: $12-20/year for domain name, EC2: ~$80-90/year for compute time) and time consuming.

Is there a reason someone might not want to use Amplify when building SPAs?

My initial thought is that using CodePipeline might get the user to the page faster since it's already built and ready to go. Although the site I have in mind is for internal users and will won't be visited very often, maybe a few times a week. Is that right? Feel free to correct me / my assumptions.

single-page-application aws-amplify aws-codepipeline amazon-web-services amazon-ec2
2 Answers

I wasn't able to find much online, but talking to AWS professionals helped me find an answer:

  • AWS Amplify is a managed service, so you have much less control over the environment/installed packages that might affect your website / you have to deal with other implied disadvantages of managed services
  • The build time will eventually cost more than it is to run the EC2 if a lot of people visit the site
  • You don't have the ability to use load balancers to distribute traffic
user_113138010
user_84807050
Related