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

31–40 of 70 posts

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#31

Post by harpratap »

ncsurfus wrote: post #17
kureikain wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have very nice features that provider's load balancing might not offer you. First to me is the ability to retain the IP address. When using AWS Load Balancer, the LB scale automatically and replace the IP. Second is sophisiciated routing. Example route by cookie. What it buy is that by setting a cookie you can make sure the request hit a specific pool. You can also have concept of backup Third is lots of useful…

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?

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#32

Post by AlexSW »

bullen wrote: post #29

HAProxy is great software, mostly because Willy can focus. But I feel sorry for him now, with HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 the pain will never stop. And IPv6 makes most of this obsolete if it happens! I stick with HTTP/1.1 since I'm building a native 3D MMO; only Microsoft can block port 80 which I doubt they will atleast in the coming 5 years! Linux wont, they are not that stupid. Edit: allready the bots have downvoted, this i…

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

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#33

Post by bullen »

AlexSW wrote: post #32
bullen wrote: post #29

HAProxy is great software, mostly because Willy can focus. But I feel sorry for him now, with HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 the pain will never stop. And IPv6 makes most of this obsolete if it happens! I stick with HTTP/1.1 since I'm building a native 3D MMO; only Microsoft can block port 80 which I doubt they will atleast in the coming 5 years! Linux wont, they are not that stupid. Edit: allready the bots have downvoted, this i…

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.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#34

Post by saurik »

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?

The normal AWS load balancers are set up to stay in service as long as the cache time on their IP address having been served by DNS... (which, FWIW, I have long argued "isn't sufficient", as many ISPs in countries half a world away from the US or using tech like satellites don't honor DNS cache times and then your requests end up getting routed to someone else... I routinely got tons of HTTP requests clearly destined for someone else's product).

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#35

Post by TimWolla »

pull_my_finger wrote: post #25

I've been long interested in HAProxy, but I can't seem to sell myself on it. When might I choose HAProxy that OpenResty[1] would not be sufficient or better? [1]: https://openresty.org/en/

Disclosure: Community contributor to HAProxy, I help maintain HAProxy's issue tracker.

HAProxy is virtually unusable as a file server, but really shines as a reverse proxy. One of the main reasons I almost always deploy HAProxy in tandem with (stock) nginx is the superior HTTP rewriting / configuration. See also my comment back on HAProxy 2.0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20198232

HAProxy's configuration is a procedural style configuration. The HTTP rules (e.g. adding or deleting headers) are processed in order if their condition matches. (Stock) nginx has a declarative configuration which makes it hard for me to understand which options apply when and the inheritance by nesting different blocks is sometimes very confusing. One example would be an `add_header` in a `location` completely overriding (instead of extending) an `add_header` in a `server`. So if I want to put e.g. HSTS into the server to apply to the full host and also want to add headers for different paths, then I need to duplicate the HSTS stuff.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#37

Post by kzrdude »

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".

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#38

Post by osrec »

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.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#39

Post by racingmars »

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.

What?! Load balancers tend to be in place for availability and scalability reasons, not to save IP addresses. Sure, there are many use cases where you might not need to have public IPs on the backends a load balancer is sending traffic to, but to say that's the only "real" reason for a load balancer seems to be missing the point.

Re: HAProxy 2.4

#40

Post by AdrianB1 »

rogerdonut wrote: post #24
AdrianB1 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Thanks for the feedback. I've provided a few replies below but I think you have made some great points and I will share them internally. > - the site does not do a good job of describing the products and what they do. The page does lead off by telling you it is a software load balancer, but I agree, we can do a better job of giving more information on the product itself. Most people who pursue HAProxy Enterprise are…

Thank you. Just for info, my personal experience working for a very big American company is that every time I call a product company for information, I get intensely called back months in a row even if the product does not meet our needs, so I prefer not to do that anymore and to dig myself for info until I figure if that is looking very promising. Maybe it is not the same in your case, but who acts assuming it's an exception?
Post reply on HN