3 ms·

> I'm still waiting to hear your performance requirements btw. I suppose this encapsulates why I get turned off of Caddy every time I look into it: Basic conce

> I'm still waiting to hear your performance requirements btw. I suppose this encapsulates why I get turned off of Caddy every time I look into it: Basic concerns (including questions about approximate performance) are met with suggestions that I don’t know what I want and therefore I’m not qualified to make such judgments.

throwaway894345 5y ago
You're being unduly defensive. mholt is telling you that he can't provide meaningful general purpose performance numbers because the breadth of cases for Caddy vary too widely, so he's asking you for information about your specific use case so he can give you the very information you're complaining about not being able to access, but you're being cagey about sharing those requirements. You're certainly within your rights to not use Caddy, but it makes no sense to complain that you can't get the performance information you need when you won't share any information about your use case.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > but you're being cagey about sharing those requirements. I don’t have one single set of requirements for every location I use a web server. Nobody does. If Caddy is good for one thing but not so good for other things, why is it so hard to come out and say that? Also, the benchmark I was questioning in the opening comment came from mholt on the official community forum. It’s mind boggling that I’m getting attacked for questioning the benchmark result that they provided in the first place.
  - joshmanders 5y ago
    Nobody is attacking you. Calm down, yeesh. You want performance metrics, but can't even tell us what metrics matter to you, but expect Matt and Caddy team to have them just available... You understand that your responses here are directly proving his point on not having them, right?
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    > I don’t have one single set of requirements for every location I use a web server. Nobody does. Right, you have to analyze each case separately. There's no way to meaningfully quantify performance across all cases. > If Caddy is good for one thing but not so good for other things, why is it so hard to come out and say that? Perhaps because that doesn't tell you anything? You can post microbenchmarks for very specific use cases but almost everyone extrapolates way too much from microbenchmarks and the folks who don't will tell you that microbenchmarks are virtually useless. > It’s mind boggling that I’m getting attacked Oh grief, you're not being "attacked". You're being melodramatic. I don't have a dog in this fight, I was just trying to clarify the conversation. If you're bent on reacting to a distorted perception of the conversation, there's not much I can do about that.
- stronglikedan 5y ago
  > mholt is telling you It's not what he's saying, but how he's saying it. "I'm still waiting to hear your performance requirements btw.", is a condescending, dismissive tone that would put more people off than not. Especially considering it was a reply within just a couple minutes of his initial question.
  - mholt 5y ago
    Sorry, don't mean to be condescending or dismissive. Just trying to get stuff done. To do that, I'll need that information.
    - genewitch 5y ago
      I've only used caddy twice, but it worked for like 2 years without interruption both times. I don't think you're being negative or whatever and I also think the other person has an idea of what they want to know but not how to explain it. Do they want connection handling metrics? SSL terminations? Caching performance? Also, not at you but a general laugh, "the reverse proxy isn't the bottleneck ever" is funny because prior to haproxy, getting gigabit throughput to a backend was considered extreme engineering. Now I can load balance and ssl terminate a gigabit with like 5 raspberry pi and an old Intel box to load balance and cache.

throwaway894345 5y ago

You're being unduly defensive. mholt is telling you that he can't provide meaningful general purpose performance numbers because the breadth of cases for Caddy vary too widely, so he's asking you for information about your specific use case so he can give you the very information you're complaining about not being able to access, but you're being cagey about sharing those requirements. You're certainly within your rights to not use Caddy, but it makes no sense to complain that you can't get the performance information you need when you won't share any information about your use case.

PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> but you're being cagey about sharing those requirements. I don’t have one single set of requirements for every location I use a web server. Nobody does. If Caddy is good for one thing but not so good for other things, why is it so hard to come out and say that? Also, the benchmark I was questioning in the opening comment came from mholt on the official community forum. It’s mind boggling that I’m getting attacked for questioning the benchmark result that they provided in the first place.
- joshmanders 5y ago
  Nobody is attacking you. Calm down, yeesh. You want performance metrics, but can't even tell us what metrics matter to you, but expect Matt and Caddy team to have them just available... You understand that your responses here are directly proving his point on not having them, right?
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  > I don’t have one single set of requirements for every location I use a web server. Nobody does. Right, you have to analyze each case separately. There's no way to meaningfully quantify performance across all cases. > If Caddy is good for one thing but not so good for other things, why is it so hard to come out and say that? Perhaps because that doesn't tell you anything? You can post microbenchmarks for very specific use cases but almost everyone extrapolates way too much from microbenchmarks and the folks who don't will tell you that microbenchmarks are virtually useless. > It’s mind boggling that I’m getting attacked Oh grief, you're not being "attacked". You're being melodramatic. I don't have a dog in this fight, I was just trying to clarify the conversation. If you're bent on reacting to a distorted perception of the conversation, there's not much I can do about that.
stronglikedan 5y ago
> mholt is telling you It's not what he's saying, but how he's saying it. "I'm still waiting to hear your performance requirements btw.", is a condescending, dismissive tone that would put more people off than not. Especially considering it was a reply within just a couple minutes of his initial question.
- mholt 5y ago
  Sorry, don't mean to be condescending or dismissive. Just trying to get stuff done. To do that, I'll need that information.
  - genewitch 5y ago
    I've only used caddy twice, but it worked for like 2 years without interruption both times. I don't think you're being negative or whatever and I also think the other person has an idea of what they want to know but not how to explain it. Do they want connection handling metrics? SSL terminations? Caching performance? Also, not at you but a general laugh, "the reverse proxy isn't the bottleneck ever" is funny because prior to haproxy, getting gigabit throughput to a backend was considered extreme engineering. Now I can load balance and ssl terminate a gigabit with like 5 raspberry pi and an old Intel box to load balance and cache.