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

HAProxy 2.4

haproxy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 70 posts

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#41

Post by AdrianB1 »

osrec wrote: post #38
kzrdude wrote: post #37

Any blog post or release announcement that is expected to get wide dissemination should preferably have a blurb that explains what the project/product is , so that the post is accessible to more people. Maybe something like "The Reliable, High Performance TCP/HTTP Load Balancer".

HAProxy is so well known that it really doesn't need to. I mean, you wouldn't expect Facebook to mention the fact that it's a social network on every one of its blog posts. And if you don't know of the product, just Google it.

It is a matter of choice. Do you mind adding a sentence for the people that are too lazy to do some search? Maybe if they are too lazy they are not interested in the product, but the cost of that sentence is negligible. Even Facebook was a lot less popular at some time and my mother asked me what is that.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#42

Post by osrec »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #41
osrec wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HAProxy is so well known that it really doesn't need to. I mean, you wouldn't expect Facebook to mention the fact that it's a social network on every one of its blog posts. And if you don't know of the product, just Google it.

It is a matter of choice. Do you mind adding a sentence for the people that are too lazy to do some search? Maybe if they are too lazy they are not interested in the product, but the cost of that sentence is negligible. Even Facebook was a lot less popular at some time and my mother asked me what is that.

The cost of the sentence is screen real estate, plus a distraction from the purpose of the post.

I sometimes feel the collective of spirit of HN can never be satisfied. If you do put that sentence in, someone will probably question why it's there :p

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#43

Post by osrec »

I can only imagine some investment banks have donated a fair bit given that HAProxy now has built in support for FIX. I really wasn't expecting to see that!

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#44

Post by [deleted] »

osrec wrote: post #43

I can only imagine some investment banks have donated a fair bit given that HAProxy now has built in support for FIX. I really wasn't expecting to see that!

[deleted]

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#45

Post by oogali »

osrec wrote: post #43

I can only imagine some investment banks have donated a fair bit given that HAProxy now has built in support for FIX. I really wasn't expecting to see that!

Since ~2004, folks in the financial industry have been migrating away from FIX to other lighter protocols such as ITCH, OUCH, and SBE (standardized from FAST: "FIX Adapted for Streaming").

This is analogous to the move we're all witnessing from HTTP to HTTP/2 (standardized from SPDY) and HTTP/3 (QUIC).

The desire to reduce the amount of bandwidth spent pushing uncompressed text around and reduce the amount of CPU needed to parse strings is what spurred market participants to explore alternatives to FIX, namely in the form of binary encoded message that costs less to parse (from a CPU and bandwidth perspective).

As libraries release support for alternative protocols and the industry compiles their projects against these newer versions, the adoption of non-FIX will keep increasing.

Similar to how you get HTTP/2 for "free" when using the Go stdlib so its downstream consumers such as Caddy and Traefik can provide that as a default to end users.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electronic_trading_pro...

EDIT: Added year for context on timeframe of first implementations

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#46

Post by purerandomness »

bullen wrote: post #33
AlexSW wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell whether I'm missing something: how would IPv6 obsolete their work?

The only "real" reason you need a loadbalancer is that you want to save IP addresses. If all your machines have their own unique public address you can loadbalance with your own software by pointing people directly to different machines.

A load balancer is, for example, used to distribute traffic to multiple worker nodes to scale horizontally.

It can also be used for canary deployments where you roll out a feature to 1% of your user base.

There are several other use cases. I'm pretty sure 'saving IP addresses' is not a use case you'd use a load balancer for.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#47

Post by ris »

harpratap wrote: post #31
ncsurfus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small note - AWS Network Load Balancers maintain the same IP addresses.

Yeah I was confused too. Why on earth will someone provide a load balancer if it keeps changing it's IP address as it scales?

Because they're intended to be referenced via hostname, and yes, regular HTTP AWS load balancers do indeed rotate their IPs.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#48

Post by zbentley »

bullen wrote: post #33
AlexSW wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell whether I'm missing something: how would IPv6 obsolete their work?

The only "real" reason you need a loadbalancer is that you want to save IP addresses. If all your machines have their own unique public address you can loadbalance with your own software by pointing people directly to different machines.

> The only "real" reason you need a loadbalancer is that you want to save IP addresses.

NAT. You're thinking of NAT.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#49

Post by nijave »

bullen wrote: post #33
AlexSW wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell whether I'm missing something: how would IPv6 obsolete their work?

The only "real" reason you need a loadbalancer is that you want to save IP addresses. If all your machines have their own unique public address you can loadbalance with your own software by pointing people directly to different machines.

Even with scarce IPv4 you could currently do that just running backends on different ports

It's common to do internal services that way but you can't control how or who or the internet might try to connect to your service so the load balancer offers a layer of protection so servers can't be picked off individually.

They can also offer an abstraction/routing layer so you can do things like canaries and controlled rollouts which would be much more difficult just advertising IPs directly to the client.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#50

Post by NDizzle »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #23
rogerdonut wrote: post #7

Author of the blog post here, happy to answer any questions about this release.

Not specific to this release, but for an system architect that is taking the first look ever to the product: - the site does not do a good job of describing the products and what they do. https://www.haproxy.com/products/haproxy-enterprise-edition/ has a download button as the start and tells nothing about the product. - it is hard to find requirements from the first page. ( https://www.haproxy.com/documentation/hape…

How did you get a system architect title while somehow never looking at haproxy in the last.... 15 years?!
Post reply on HN