4 ms·

Caddy is indeed wonderful for straightforward and simple projects. There are a number of complex configurations used by larger organizations that are well serv

Caddy is indeed wonderful for straightforward and simple projects. There are a number of complex configurations used by larger organizations that are well served today by Nginx Plus, HAProxy, and Traefik that don't seem possible with Caddy. And it's difficult to get a sense of whether the Caddy developers are interested in meeting those more complex use cases or whether they want to keep Caddy smaller and simpler. But yes, by all means, for a simple project pick Caddy!

bosch_mind 3y ago
Can you speak more to usecases that aren’t fulfilled by Caddy? Also, any ideas if performance matches NGINX at scale?
mholt 3y ago
Caddy is more capable and extensible than all those servers, even out of the box. Example: https://github.com/traefik/traefik/issues/5472#issuecomment-1966563229 https://github.com/traefik/traefik/issues/5472#issuecomment-... > welcome to 2024. it is shame that traefik cannot handle functionality which can be handled by caddy2. (posted this morning) Anyway, we already do walk up to quite a few complex requirements in large enterprise deployments. Happy to hear about your use case that isn't possible!
- bklyn11201 3y ago
  1) Nginx Plus and HAProxy have nice consoles to view your thousand upstreams and their current health. The Nginx Plus GUI is Apache 2.0 (https://github.com/nginxinc/nginx-plus-dashboard https://github.com/nginxinc/nginx-plus-dashboard). 2) Nginx has this concept of rewrite "last" (instead of permanent or temporary) 3) Nginx Plus and HAProxy both have TCP routing OOTB without needing to recompile 4) Nginx and Nginx Plus have more ability to intercept a response from an upstream and modify it vs Caddy's fairly limited handle_response {} 5) Modify body content from upstream seems to require a Caddy module 6) Very difficult to find good Caddy configs and thus why LLMs have such a hard-time helping people with Caddy configs. Having a library of configs would probably help this training There seems to be an incredible market opportunity for Caddy as I've lost a lost of trust in the Nginx ecosystem and commercial environment. I would get some of these modules into core Caddy so that they are easy to distribute to people used to just installing via apt. And then attack the Nginx Plus features one by one. Add a visual console even though I understand why it doesn't seem like a necessity. I'd love to see Caddy take share and would love to re-allocate my Nginx Plus spend over to Caddy support.

bosch_mind 3y ago

Can you speak more to usecases that aren’t fulfilled by Caddy? Also, any ideas if performance matches NGINX at scale?

mholt 3y ago

Caddy is more capable and extensible than all those servers, even out of the box. Example: https://github.com/traefik/traefik/issues/5472#issuecomment-1966563229 https://github.com/traefik/traefik/issues/5472#issuecomment-... > welcome to 2024. it is shame that traefik cannot handle functionality which can be handled by caddy2. (posted this morning) Anyway, we already do walk up to quite a few complex requirements in large enterprise deployments. Happy to hear about your use case that isn't possible!

bklyn11201 3y ago
1) Nginx Plus and HAProxy have nice consoles to view your thousand upstreams and their current health. The Nginx Plus GUI is Apache 2.0 (https://github.com/nginxinc/nginx-plus-dashboard https://github.com/nginxinc/nginx-plus-dashboard). 2) Nginx has this concept of rewrite "last" (instead of permanent or temporary) 3) Nginx Plus and HAProxy both have TCP routing OOTB without needing to recompile 4) Nginx and Nginx Plus have more ability to intercept a response from an upstream and modify it vs Caddy's fairly limited handle_response {} 5) Modify body content from upstream seems to require a Caddy module 6) Very difficult to find good Caddy configs and thus why LLMs have such a hard-time helping people with Caddy configs. Having a library of configs would probably help this training There seems to be an incredible market opportunity for Caddy as I've lost a lost of trust in the Nginx ecosystem and commercial environment. I would get some of these modules into core Caddy so that they are easy to distribute to people used to just installing via apt. And then attack the Nginx Plus features one by one. Add a visual console even though I understand why it doesn't seem like a necessity. I'd love to see Caddy take share and would love to re-allocate my Nginx Plus spend over to Caddy support.