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

Caddy 0.10 Released

caddyserver.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 128 posts

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#11

Post by shawabawa3 »

blowski wrote: post #7
shawabawa3 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I use nginx and go through the hassle of configuring let's encrypt and sane SSL settings when I could just use caddy? But seriously, for all "hobby" projects I've started recently, and even some production services now, I go straight to caddy. My config consists of a 1 line global config file: import sites-enabled/* And 90% of the individual services have this config: example.com { proxy / http://localhost:…

What's the performance like? Can you use it as a proxy server?

I use it exclusively as a proxy server.

I've never noticed any performance issues, I think I saw a benchmark where it said caddy can handle 2000req/s, which is at least an order of magnitude or 2 faster than any upstream service I've used it in front of.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#12

Post by shawabawa3 »

xiphias wrote: post #6
knrz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the niche Caddy's trying to fill is for people who don't want to bother with that, or don't want to learn. If you already know how to set up nginx and LE (like you and I do), its only appeal is relatively minor: potentially saving a quarter or half hour.

I think over time there will be a similar server written in Rust, where at least we can be sure that there are no buffer overflows..until then nginx is probably better in every situation.

Caddy is written in go, not C, so I'm not sure why it should be especially vulnerable to buffer overflows...

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#13

Post by interfixus »

knrz wrote: post #3
blowski wrote: post #2

When would I use Caddy, rather than using nginx and configuring Let's Encrypt for myself? Honest question.

I feel like the niche Caddy's trying to fill is for people who don't want to bother with that, or don't want to learn. If you already know how to set up nginx and LE (like you and I do), its only appeal is relatively minor: potentially saving a quarter or half hour.

its only appeal is relatively minor

Is that factual, or also something you feel like?

To us simple folks, you know, it looks as if Caddy has a number of use cases where it's a much neater fit than nginx. We like the extreme simplicity and the transparency of it all. Some of us also like the Go it's written in. What with the magic Go modularity, you can actually embed this server in your web-app. Or is it the other way round? Comes in handy, at any rate.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#14

Post by interfixus »

anc84 wrote: post #9
dev247 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I made the complete switch to Caddy just because the configuration is simplified and it has features like git webhooks built-in. Setting up BasicAuth on a directory is one line in the config. And it's fast. No issues so far, been using Caddy for over a year now.

I vouched for this comment to bring it back from dead. dev247, you seem ghosted for all the account's lifespan for no apparent reason. Contact hn@ycombinator.com to get reset to a proper user account!

So did I. What's the deal with this absolutely harmless comment being going all grey and dead?

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#15

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

blowski wrote: post #7
shawabawa3 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would I use nginx and go through the hassle of configuring let's encrypt and sane SSL settings when I could just use caddy? But seriously, for all "hobby" projects I've started recently, and even some production services now, I go straight to caddy. My config consists of a 1 line global config file: import sites-enabled/* And 90% of the individual services have this config: example.com { proxy / http://localhost:…

What's the performance like? Can you use it as a proxy server?

It can act as a reverse proxy, yes. I would also love to see some performance benchmarks.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#16

Post by overcast »

So far I'm loving Caddy. Super simple to configure, and the auto management of SSL certificates is magical. However, for all of the simplicity, they are still pretty resistant to properly packaging it up in the repositories. By far the longest part of getting it running, is the stupid manual configuration of launch daemons, working directories, and permissions. For software that prides itself on dead simple management, the basics of getting it into a package manager should not even be a discussion.

With that said, I 100% moved all of my sites from Nginx to Caddy after the config file setup is around three lines per site.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#17

Post by grey-area »

blowski wrote: post #2

When would I use Caddy, rather than using nginx and configuring Let's Encrypt for myself? Honest question.

It's a lot easier than ngxinx + letsencrypt + cron job - there is zero config to get letsencrypt up and running and certs renewing automatically.

It supports http2 out of the box and will keep improving as the go net/http library does, performance is good (certainly good enough for 99.9% of the static sites out there, I haven't specifically benchmarked against nginx but response times didn't change much). I'd recommend it as a proxy if you need one, particularly if you need one that handles your tls certs.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#18

Post by anc84 »

interfixus wrote: post #14
anc84 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I vouched for this comment to bring it back from dead. dev247, you seem ghosted for all the account's lifespan for no apparent reason. Contact hn@ycombinator.com to get reset to a proper user account!

So did I. What's the deal with this absolutely harmless comment being going all grey and dead?

The account was probably automatically flagged by some algorithm 3 years ago. Yay for smart machines and no human oversight!

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#19

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

knrz wrote: post #3
blowski wrote: post #2

When would I use Caddy, rather than using nginx and configuring Let's Encrypt for myself? Honest question.

I feel like the niche Caddy's trying to fill is for people who don't want to bother with that, or don't want to learn. If you already know how to set up nginx and LE (like you and I do), its only appeal is relatively minor: potentially saving a quarter or half hour.

I'm not opposed to learning, but it's like learning emacs when nano legitimately covers all your use cases: potentially useful, but unconvincing ROI. And if we pretend for a moment that it's really only a quarter hour saved, why would I not save that time if all other things are held fixed?

Caddy isn't the universal solution, but it sounds like you're rationalizing using the more complex tool because you know it and have been using it rather than because it's necessarily superior.

Re: Caddy 0.10 Released

#20

Post by knrz »

interfixus wrote: post #13
knrz wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the niche Caddy's trying to fill is for people who don't want to bother with that, or don't want to learn. If you already know how to set up nginx and LE (like you and I do), its only appeal is relatively minor: potentially saving a quarter or half hour.

its only appeal is relatively minor Is that factual, or also something you feel like? To us simple folks, you know, it looks as if Caddy has a number of use cases where it's a much neater fit than nginx. We like the extreme simplicity and the transparency of it all. Some of us also like the Go it's written in. What with the magic Go modularity, you can actually embed this server in your web-app. Or is it the other wa…

That was a feel. I never thought of the idea of embedding it. Thanks for teaching me more!
Post reply on HN