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

Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#91

Post by mholt »

humblepie wrote: post #87
francislavoie wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JSON is way easier to work with for "machines". The Caddyfile is a user-facing layer on top of that. The Caddyfile doesn't map as nicely to something usable at runtime. That was the entire point of the Caddy v2 rewrite; the v1 Caddyfile was inflexible and was turning into spaghetti. Like Matt said, I don't understand the problem here. Just use the Caddyfile. What problem do you have with it specifically? If there's a…

Loved the JSON file. I was a newcomer to Caddy and started using it when v2 just came out. The JSON config is really simple to write--as long as you have a huge screen :) Never really bothered with the Caddyfile syntax. Also thanks for fixing the slow JSON schema docs pages, really helped a lot.

Glad you like it! I spent months designing the Caddy config and how the JSON structure would look/work.

The docs pages took longer to make than the core of Caddy 2 did, so I'm glad you like those too and find them helpful. That performance fix was a breath of fresh air for me too.

Anyway, nice to hear from another happy JSON consumer. I know several large companies using the JSON exclusively as well.

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#92

Post by nreece »

I like the idea behind Caddy, but concerned about performance compared to nginx. Anyone got any real-world production benchmarks?

One I found from 2020 shows nginx can handle more RPS in less time for HTTP/2 and HTTP/3: https://caddy.community/t/caddy-v2-http-2-http-3-benchmarks/...

A proxy benchmark from 2021 also shows nginx perform better than Caddy: https://github.com/NickMRamirez/Proxy-Benchmarks

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#93

Post by llanowarelves »

nreece wrote: post #92

I like the idea behind Caddy, but concerned about performance compared to nginx. Anyone got any real-world production benchmarks? One I found from 2020 shows nginx can handle more RPS in less time for HTTP/2 and HTTP/3: https://caddy.community/t/caddy-v2-http-2-http-3-benchmarks/... A proxy benchmark from 2021 also shows nginx perform better than Caddy: https://github.com/NickMRamirez/Proxy-Benchmarks

Also curious to see production performance.

After testing my app with it in local dev I noticed what the benchmark above says: requests per second is about half Nginx. So i switched back to Nginx.

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#94

Post by number6 »

evv wrote: post #73
sgt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a heavy nginx user - there's not much that I haven't already done with it and I know the documentation quite well. Why would someone like me change to Caddy? I can see there are some NGINX Plus features that are free in Caddy.

I wouldn't put effort into changing if you have no troubles with nginx. Caddy has some neat features like live-configuration and built in LetsEncrypt. Plus the JSON configuration is a great idea, once I get it working. The real reason is the thing you highlighted: "I can see there are some NGINX Plus features that are free in Caddy." Sadly it seems that NGINX is now crippleware. Personally I find it risky to depend o…

Back in the days, there was an issue with caddy regarding having to pay for it if you bundle some plugins with it. I can't remember now - must have been years ago. This is why I ultimately landed at traefik and nginx as my go-to setup.

Is this still the case?

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#95

Post by POPOSYS »

Unfortunately it still does not come with some good rate limiting oob, I found https://github.com/mholt/caddy-ratelimit which is "work in progress" only - not clear if that is ok for production.

I really like the slickness of caddy, but I do not understand how a web server without rate limiting can be used for anything serious, you will need that for any website with some exposure.

Not sure if anything else is missing in comparison to nginx, I stopped research at this first very important point. I think streaming would be my next item on the list of things that you might realize nginx is not that bad at...

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#97

Post by ThePhysicist »

nreece wrote: post #92

I like the idea behind Caddy, but concerned about performance compared to nginx. Anyone got any real-world production benchmarks? One I found from 2020 shows nginx can handle more RPS in less time for HTTP/2 and HTTP/3: https://caddy.community/t/caddy-v2-http-2-http-3-benchmarks/... A proxy benchmark from 2021 also shows nginx perform better than Caddy: https://github.com/NickMRamirez/Proxy-Benchmarks

Nginx is written in C and optimized to avoid dynamic memory allocation, whereas Go's net/http stack performs a lot of allocations, which I think are them main source of the observed performance difference (together with different approaches regarding socket handling and polling, I think). There are libraries like fasthttp that can significantly speed up Go HTTP performance, but they have their own set of tradeoffs.

So yeah if you worry about peak throughput on a CPU-bound system Caddy probably isn't the right choice though I'm not sure nginx is, either. A hardware-based load balancer, at least as a pre-stage is probably more sane in those cases. For everything else I would always trade ease of usage for a bit of performance. I would e.g. never dare to touch the nginx codebase, but writing a plugin for Caddy doesn't intimidate me at all.

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#98

Post by figassis »

mholt wrote: post #8

Francis definitely gets to claim the "Show HN" on this one, as he authored more commits to Caddy during this timeframe than I did: https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/graphs/contributors?fro... He and several other maintainers, community helpers, distribution team members, and sponsors go a long way to making this project tick. Thanks for all you do!

Caddy is my server/proxy of choice. It replaced Traefik, but I have one complaint. It looks like the documentation if very outdated. The examples in the official docs or elsewhere on the internet never work, and I always find myself ging to docker hub and then browsing the source for hints of the correct configuration. This happens especially when configuring letsencrypt or zerossl and the name of the properties keep changing. There are other examples, but this is my main gripe.

Is there a place where we can contribute to more up to date docs?

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#99

Post by mads »

figassis wrote: post #98
mholt wrote: post #8

Francis definitely gets to claim the "Show HN" on this one, as he authored more commits to Caddy during this timeframe than I did: https://github.com/caddyserver/caddy/graphs/contributors?fro... He and several other maintainers, community helpers, distribution team members, and sponsors go a long way to making this project tick. Thanks for all you do!

Caddy is my server/proxy of choice. It replaced Traefik, but I have one complaint. It looks like the documentation if very outdated. The examples in the official docs or elsewhere on the internet never work, and I always find myself ging to docker hub and then browsing the source for hints of the correct configuration. This happens especially when configuring letsencrypt or zerossl and the name of the properties keep…

I agree. I really liked Caddy, when I used it a while back, but the documentation did stand out as being particularly in need of some love.

Re: Show HN: Caddy v2.5.0

#100

Post by tpetry »

mads wrote: post #99
figassis wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Caddy is my server/proxy of choice. It replaced Traefik, but I have one complaint. It looks like the documentation if very outdated. The examples in the official docs or elsewhere on the internet never work, and I always find myself ging to docker hub and then browsing the source for hints of the correct configuration. This happens especially when configuring letsencrypt or zerossl and the name of the properties keep…

I agree. I really liked Caddy, when I used it a while back, but the documentation did stand out as being particularly in need of some love.

It‘s in this state since v2 has been released. You will also find either trivial examples for the simple Caddyfile format or the very complex json format. Very often I have to try for a very long time whether a json configuration is available for Caddyfile - basicslly googling 30+ min.
Post reply on HN