Documentation
Decisions
ADR-0002: Tech Stack and Architecture

ADR-0002: Tech Stack and Architecture

Status

Accepted

Date

2025-08-23

Context

We need to establish the technology stack and architecture for our startup landing page. The requirements include:

  • Fast development and deployment
  • Cost-effective hosting (initially free tier)
  • Scalable architecture for future growth
  • Modern development experience
  • SEO-friendly frontend
  • Reliable backend API
  • Robust database solution

Decision

We have decided on the following tech stack:

Frontend: Next.js on Vercel

  • Technology: Next.js (React framework)
  • Hosting: Vercel
  • Tier: Free tier initially

Backend: Go API on Render.com

  • Technology: Go (Golang)
  • Hosting: Render.com
  • Tier: Free tier initially

Database: Supabase

  • Technology: PostgreSQL via Supabase
  • Hosting: Supabase cloud
  • Tier: Free tier initially

Rationale

Next.js on Vercel

Advantages:

  • Performance: Built-in optimizations (Image optimization, automatic code splitting, SSR/SSG)
  • SEO: Server-side rendering and static site generation capabilities
  • Developer Experience: Hot reloading, TypeScript support, excellent debugging tools
  • Deployment: Seamless integration with Vercel for zero-config deployments
  • Cost: Generous free tier (100GB bandwidth, unlimited personal projects)
  • Scalability: Automatic scaling with edge functions and CDN

Free Tier Limits:

  • 100GB bandwidth per month
  • 1000 serverless function invocations per day
  • 100 GB-hours of serverless function execution time

Go API on Render.com

Advantages:

  • Performance: Go’s excellent performance and low memory footprint
  • Simplicity: Simple deployment model, single binary distribution
  • Concurrency: Built-in goroutines for handling concurrent requests
  • Type Safety: Strong typing system reduces runtime errors
  • Standard Library: Comprehensive standard library reduces external dependencies
  • Cost: Free tier available with automatic sleep after inactivity

Free Tier Limits:

  • 512MB RAM
  • 0.1 CPU
  • Automatic sleep after 15 minutes of inactivity
  • 750 hours per month of runtime

Supabase Database

Advantages:

  • Technology: PostgreSQL - battle-tested, ACID compliant, feature-rich
  • Real-time: Built-in real-time subscriptions
  • Authentication: Integrated auth system with multiple providers
  • API: Auto-generated REST and GraphQL APIs
  • Dashboard: User-friendly database management interface
  • Migrations: Built-in database migration system
  • Cost: Generous free tier with 500MB database storage

Free Tier Limits:

  • Up to 500MB database space
  • Up to 2GB bandwidth per month
  • Up to 50,000 monthly active users
  • 7 days of log retention

Architecture Overview 

[User Browser] 
    ↓ (HTTPS)
[Vercel CDN/Edge] 
    ↓ (Static Assets + SSR)
[Next.js Application]
    ↓ (API Calls)
[Render.com Go API]
    ↓ (Database Queries)
[Supabase PostgreSQL]

Implementation Plan

  1. Phase 1: Set up Next.js frontend with basic landing page
  2. Phase 2: Deploy Go API with basic endpoints on Render.com
  3. Phase 3: Set up Supabase database with initial schema
  4. Phase 4: Integrate all components and implement core features
  5. Phase 5: Optimize for production and monitor usage

Migration Strategy

When free tier limits are exceeded:

Vercel

  • Upgrade to Pro plan ($20/month) for increased bandwidth and build minutes
  • Consider Vercel Enterprise for high-traffic scenarios

Render.com

  • Upgrade to Starter plan ($7/month) for always-on service
  • Scale to higher tiers as traffic grows

Supabase

  • Upgrade to Pro plan ($25/month) for increased storage and bandwidth
  • Consider dedicated instances for high-performance requirements

Alternative Considerations

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

  1. Frontend Alternatives:

    • Create React App: Less optimized, requires additional configuration
    • Gatsby: Overkill for simple landing page, static-first approach
    • Vue.js/Nuxt.js: Smaller ecosystem, less familiar to team

  2. Backend Alternatives:

    • Node.js: Higher memory usage, callback complexity
    • Python/Django: Heavier runtime, slower cold starts
    • Serverless Functions: Vendor lock-in, cold start latency

  3. Database Alternatives:

    • Firebase: NoSQL limitations, Google vendor lock-in
    • PlanetScale: MySQL-based, more complex branching model
    • Railway PostgreSQL: Less mature platform, fewer features

Consequences

Positive

  • Rapid development and deployment cycle
  • Zero infrastructure management initially
  • Modern, scalable technology stack
  • Cost-effective for startup phase
  • Strong community support for all technologies
  • Clear upgrade path as we scale

Negative

  • Potential vendor lock-in (mitigated by using standard technologies)
  • Free tier limitations may require upgrades sooner than expected
  • Cold start latency on Render.com free tier
  • Multiple vendor relationships to manage

Risks and Mitigation

  1. Free Tier Exhaustion

    • Risk: Unexpected traffic spikes
    • Mitigation: Monitor usage closely, set up alerts

  2. Vendor Lock-in

    • Risk: Difficulty migrating away from platforms
    • Mitigation: Use standard technologies, containerize applications

  3. Performance Issues

    • Risk: Cold starts and free tier limitations
    • Mitigation: Plan upgrade path, implement caching strategies

Success Metrics

  • Page load times < 2 seconds
  • API response times < 500ms
  • 99.9% uptime
  • Successful handling of traffic spikes
  • Cost remains under $100/month for first 6 months

Review Date

This decision will be reviewed in 3 months (November 2025) or when traffic exceeds free tier limitations, whichever comes first.

ADR-0001: Documentation Strategy