3 ms·

The author states: > After playing with professional Load Balancers like NGINX I tried creating a simple Load Balancer for fun. And while nginx[0] certainly c

The author states: > After playing with professional Load Balancers like NGINX I tried creating a simple Load Balancer for fun. And while nginx[0] certainly can perform in this role, another production quality load balancer is HAProxy[1]. Both can do more than this, of course. Reinventing solutions "for fun" certainly can be educational and help others learn key concepts, but the author should clearly state what they are doing is not meant to replace production quality solutions. 0 - https://www.nginx.com/ https://www.nginx.com/ 1 - https://www.haproxy.com/solutions/load-balancing/ https://www.haproxy.com/solutions/load-balancing/

JustSomeNobody 7y ago
> but the author should clearly state what they are doing is not meant to replace production quality solutions. If you know you need a load balancer you should already know this.
- AdieuToLogic 7y ago
  > > but the author should clearly state what they are doing is not meant to replace production quality solutions. > If you know you need a load balancer you should already know this. If you know you need a load balancer, you go and look for one. If you happen upon one in a programming language you use, then it may be more appealing. Hence the need for an explicit disclaimer.
  - cortesoft 7y ago
    But if you don't do any research to find out if it is production ready, you aren't a production ready dev anyway. A disclaimer isn't going to save them.
    - AdieuToLogic 7y ago
      > But if you don't do any research to find out if it is production ready, you aren't a production ready dev anyway. Seriously? Is victim blaming somehow more acceptable than just clearly stating that a project is not meant for production? And why is the suggestion of including a simple disclaimer so repugnant? What is so wrong with saying "this is an educational project and should not be used in production systems"?
      - cglace 7y ago
        Yes, if you will use anything that doesn’t say “NEVER USE THIS IN PRODUCTION. SERIOUSLY THIS IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY” then you are going to get burned by a lot more than a LB.
        AdieuToLogic 7y ago
        This thread, and most importantly your comment, only serve to reify the Go programming language community's toxicity.
lordleft 7y ago
Doesn't 'for fun' clearly indicate that this isn't designed to replace a professional-grade solution though?
- AdieuToLogic 7y ago
  > Doesn't 'for fun' clearly indicate that this isn't designed to replace a professional-grade solution though? Depends on the person and their understanding of English colloquialisms I suppose. What might be less misunderstood is: This is an educational project and is not meant for use in production systems. Granted, native English speakers likely will infer this project is research/educational in nature and benefit. But why leave it to chance?
  - DuskStar 7y ago
    Well the repo description is "World's most dumbest Load Balancer", which might count for something
    - AdieuToLogic 7y ago
      > Well the repo description is "World's most dumbest Load Balancer", which might count for something Amongst the synonyms for "dumb"[0] is "simple" and is used commonly as such. A definition of "simple" is[1]: easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.: a simple matter; simple tools. The GitHub repo[2] has as its project URI the leaf segment "simplelb"[2]. The first non-title line of the GitHub repo[2] reads thusly: Simple LB is the simplest Load Balancer ever created. Nowhere in the README.md are the words "educational", "production", "research", or "fun." All of this is to say, what "might count for something" may not be what the author intends. 0 - https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/dumb https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/dumb 1 - https://www.dictionary.com/browse/simple https://www.dictionary.com/browse/simple 2 - https://github.com/kasvith/simplelb/ https://github.com/kasvith/simplelb/
      - DuskStar 7y ago
        If you race through chains of synonyms, changing between definitions along the way, you can get almost anywhere. Why does this matter? And here's the full list of synonyms listed there: > airheaded, birdbrained, bonehead, boneheaded, brain-dead, brainless, bubbleheaded, chuckleheaded, dense, dim, dim-witted, doltish, dopey (also dopy), dorky [slang], dull, dunderheaded, empty-headed, fatuous, gormless [chiefly British], half-witted, knuckleheaded, lamebrain (or lamebrained), lunkheaded, mindless, oafish, obtuse, opaque, pinheaded, senseless, simple, slow, slow-witted, soft, softheaded, stupid, thick, thick-witted, thickheaded, unintelligent, unsmart, vacuous, weak-minded, witless

JustSomeNobody 7y ago

> but the author should clearly state what they are doing is not meant to replace production quality solutions. If you know you need a load balancer you should already know this.

AdieuToLogic 7y ago
> > but the author should clearly state what they are doing is not meant to replace production quality solutions. > If you know you need a load balancer you should already know this. If you know you need a load balancer, you go and look for one. If you happen upon one in a programming language you use, then it may be more appealing. Hence the need for an explicit disclaimer.
- cortesoft 7y ago
  But if you don't do any research to find out if it is production ready, you aren't a production ready dev anyway. A disclaimer isn't going to save them.
  - AdieuToLogic 7y ago
    > But if you don't do any research to find out if it is production ready, you aren't a production ready dev anyway. Seriously? Is victim blaming somehow more acceptable than just clearly stating that a project is not meant for production? And why is the suggestion of including a simple disclaimer so repugnant? What is so wrong with saying "this is an educational project and should not be used in production systems"?
    - cglace 7y ago
      Yes, if you will use anything that doesn’t say “NEVER USE THIS IN PRODUCTION. SERIOUSLY THIS IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY” then you are going to get burned by a lot more than a LB.
      - AdieuToLogic 7y ago
        This thread, and most importantly your comment, only serve to reify the Go programming language community's toxicity.

lordleft 7y ago

Doesn't 'for fun' clearly indicate that this isn't designed to replace a professional-grade solution though?

AdieuToLogic 7y ago
> Doesn't 'for fun' clearly indicate that this isn't designed to replace a professional-grade solution though? Depends on the person and their understanding of English colloquialisms I suppose. What might be less misunderstood is: This is an educational project and is not meant for use in production systems. Granted, native English speakers likely will infer this project is research/educational in nature and benefit. But why leave it to chance?
- DuskStar 7y ago
  Well the repo description is "World's most dumbest Load Balancer", which might count for something
  - AdieuToLogic 7y ago
    > Well the repo description is "World's most dumbest Load Balancer", which might count for something Amongst the synonyms for "dumb"[0] is "simple" and is used commonly as such. A definition of "simple" is[1]: easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.: a simple matter; simple tools. The GitHub repo[2] has as its project URI the leaf segment "simplelb"[2]. The first non-title line of the GitHub repo[2] reads thusly: Simple LB is the simplest Load Balancer ever created. Nowhere in the README.md are the words "educational", "production", "research", or "fun." All of this is to say, what "might count for something" may not be what the author intends. 0 - https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/dumb https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/dumb 1 - https://www.dictionary.com/browse/simple https://www.dictionary.com/browse/simple 2 - https://github.com/kasvith/simplelb/ https://github.com/kasvith/simplelb/
    - DuskStar 7y ago
      If you race through chains of synonyms, changing between definitions along the way, you can get almost anywhere. Why does this matter? And here's the full list of synonyms listed there: > airheaded, birdbrained, bonehead, boneheaded, brain-dead, brainless, bubbleheaded, chuckleheaded, dense, dim, dim-witted, doltish, dopey (also dopy), dorky [slang], dull, dunderheaded, empty-headed, fatuous, gormless [chiefly British], half-witted, knuckleheaded, lamebrain (or lamebrained), lunkheaded, mindless, oafish, obtuse, opaque, pinheaded, senseless, simple, slow, slow-witted, soft, softheaded, stupid, thick, thick-witted, thickheaded, unintelligent, unsmart, vacuous, weak-minded, witless