1

This question already has an answer here:

I want to connect web3 services with public Ethereum (main net/test net) to execute my smart contract method. Which is better Infura or to create my on Node? Please suggest.

marked as duplicate by Richard Horrocks, Nicolas Massart, shane, Ismael, flygoing Dec 4 '18 at 15:13

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • It has pros and cons. If you use Infura, then you depend on it. I am sure they will give uptime all the time. But if they are down, you will be down. If you setup node, then you are independent, but you have to maintain it. But for simple use case, yes Infura is best. – Yogesh - EtherAuthority.io Dec 3 '18 at 10:18
0

If you make a node for yourself, the main problem will be maintaining it online every time and it will cost for you.

Otherwise if you use Infura, It is free and its uptime is more than we can access it normally.

So I recommend to use Infura instead of your full node.

1

In other hand, centralization of INFURA is one of the problem of Ethereum eco-system.
So, using your own node is still considerable. IMO ;)

1

I use both,

For development with remix IDE / truffle or working with Metamask wallet in Chrome I like Infura for its simplicity.

When I want full control over every aspect of the development and deploy pipeline for production deployments or sensitive smart contracts I will work with my own node. I know the environment the node is deployed and managed in.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.