Elm static‑HTML output combined with Node.js port‑based SSR: evaluating cost trade‑offs for low‑traffic workloads

The goal is to minimize hosting expenses for a low‑traffic Elm web application by deciding between deploying the compiled Elm view as static HTML (using elm-static-html) on a static‑only host and running a thin Node.js server that executes Elm ports for occasional server‑side logic.

Relevant constraints include the operational overhead of maintaining a Node.js process (monitoring, scaling, patching), the potential CPU and latency impact of frequent or large data serializations through Elm ports, and the relative maturity and stability of the elm-static-html ecosystem compared to more established SSR solutions. These factors introduce uncertainty about whether the savings from a smaller Elm bundle and static hosting outweigh the added complexity of a server‑based approach.

What is the expected break‑even point in request volume where the operational cost of a Node.js server exceeds the bandwidth savings from static hosting? How does the frequency and size of data exchanged via Elm ports affect the per‑request CPU usage and overall cost? Are there known limitations or version‑specific breaking changes in elm-static-html that could increase maintenance effort for low‑traffic deployments?