Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 160 posts

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#71

Post by arielcostas »

xmodem wrote: post #70

> No reverse proxies required! This is one that has always baffled me. If there's no specific reason that a reverse proxy is helpful, I will often hang an app with an embedded Jetty out on the internet without one. This has never lead to any problems. Infra or security people will see this and ask why I don't have an nginx instance in front of it. When I ask why I need one, the answers are all hand-wavy security or p…

I think people do it out of habit at this time. In many cases it makes sense to handle TLS termination and compression, but in other instances it really is there for no reason.

Proxying is always less-performing than serving directly since you add another layer in between, right? Or am I missing something?

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#74

Post by cybrox »

xmodem wrote: post #70

> No reverse proxies required! This is one that has always baffled me. If there's no specific reason that a reverse proxy is helpful, I will often hang an app with an embedded Jetty out on the internet without one. This has never lead to any problems. Infra or security people will see this and ask why I don't have an nginx instance in front of it. When I ask why I need one, the answers are all hand-wavy security or p…

For most of my deployments, the performance impact of a reverse proxy is negligible, I have the configs pre-prepared and it allows me to add TLS termination, URL rewrites or other shenanigans without much effort in the future. So for me, it's mostly a habit that has paid out so far.

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#75

Post by xmodem »

arielcostas wrote: post #71
xmodem wrote: post #70

> No reverse proxies required! This is one that has always baffled me. If there's no specific reason that a reverse proxy is helpful, I will often hang an app with an embedded Jetty out on the internet without one. This has never lead to any problems. Infra or security people will see this and ask why I don't have an nginx instance in front of it. When I ask why I need one, the answers are all hand-wavy security or p…

I think people do it out of habit at this time. In many cases it makes sense to handle TLS termination and compression, but in other instances it really is there for no reason. Proxying is always less-performing than serving directly since you add another layer in between, right? Or am I missing something?

Jetty implements both TLS and compression, though in environments where I don't already have automated certificate issuance infrastructure in place I have occasionally deployed caddy as a reverse proxy just for the TLS termination.

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#77

Post by cbm-vic-20 »

cybrox wrote: post #74
xmodem wrote: post #70

> No reverse proxies required! This is one that has always baffled me. If there's no specific reason that a reverse proxy is helpful, I will often hang an app with an embedded Jetty out on the internet without one. This has never lead to any problems. Infra or security people will see this and ask why I don't have an nginx instance in front of it. When I ask why I need one, the answers are all hand-wavy security or p…

For most of my deployments, the performance impact of a reverse proxy is negligible, I have the configs pre-prepared and it allows me to add TLS termination, URL rewrites or other shenanigans without much effort in the future. So for me, it's mostly a habit that has paid out so far.

IME, using an Nginx or WAF layer lets the "ops people" make changes to the things you mention (TLS config, URL rewrites, etc.) without getting the "app people" involved. There's a bit of "Conway's Law" going on here, depending on the reporting structure and political makeup of the organization.

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#78

Post by fny »

xmodem wrote: post #75
arielcostas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people do it out of habit at this time. In many cases it makes sense to handle TLS termination and compression, but in other instances it really is there for no reason. Proxying is always less-performing than serving directly since you add another layer in between, right? Or am I missing something?

Jetty implements both TLS and compression, though in environments where I don't already have automated certificate issuance infrastructure in place I have occasionally deployed caddy as a reverse proxy just for the TLS termination.

Most web applications are not written in Java. NGINX also allows static assets to be served directly while side-stepping the application server. This is a boon for interpreted languages.

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#79

Post by zeroCalories »

xmodem wrote: post #75
arielcostas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people do it out of habit at this time. In many cases it makes sense to handle TLS termination and compression, but in other instances it really is there for no reason. Proxying is always less-performing than serving directly since you add another layer in between, right? Or am I missing something?

Jetty implements both TLS and compression, though in environments where I don't already have automated certificate issuance infrastructure in place I have occasionally deployed caddy as a reverse proxy just for the TLS termination.

Something like nginx will likely perform far better at serving static content and other cacheable requests. Also allows you to run two binaries at once for a rolling update.

Re: Show HN: Hosting my website using my C web server

#80

Post by xmodem »

fny wrote: post #78
xmodem wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jetty implements both TLS and compression, though in environments where I don't already have automated certificate issuance infrastructure in place I have occasionally deployed caddy as a reverse proxy just for the TLS termination.

Most web applications are not written in Java. NGINX also allows static assets to be served directly while side-stepping the application server. This is a boon for interpreted languages.

And that is a perfectly valid performance reason for adding an nginx layer in front. It does not IMO justify it in the general case however.
Post reply on HN