top | item 29385116

(no title)

orware | 4 years ago

I'm not sure I understand the criticism in the top comment in this thread about Caddy's performance.

I don't think I ever really decided to use Caddy solely based on performance itself (although already fairly familiar with Go's built-in libraries for creating HTTP servers gave me confidence that it should be fairly quickly...I wasn't overly concerned about how it directly compared to Nginx/Apache/IIS/etc.).

For me, the biggest selling point was the Caddyfile format, which felt a lot more human readable than the .htaccess or Nginx configuration options I had seen over the years (I know with Caddy v2 there's the possibly now more preferred JSON option, but I'm still a sucker for the original Caddyfile format myself :-).

There's still a lot I don't know about for all of the web server options out there in general so I don't claim to be an expert in any of them, but Caddy was the first one I felt comfortable using new situations to simplify things in my environment.

For example, Caddy's reverse proxy functionality (and the way it is setup within the Caddyfile) is what finally made that particularly capability "click" for myself over 5 years ago when I first came across Caddy (even though I had seen info how Nginx + Apache were used together in the years prior, with Nginx providing reverse proxy access to Apache in those hybrid setups, it wasn't something that had "clicked" for me being aware of those situations). Since my environment is fairly simple (no real super high demand situations requiring lots of load balancing) we mainly use Caddy to provide automatic SSL capabilities and act as the publicly accessible endpoint in our environment, and use the reverse proxy functionality to tie Caddy into the various other internal servers that need that SSL termination.

I've also been able to take advantage of the built-in static file server for an internal website need and it's actually something I really think is a nice/neat feature to have available (especially due to its ability for simple server side includes, allowing for relatively easy simple templating).

Separate from that, I've also experienced first hand the personal responses that Matt Holt has provided to myself and to many others in the Caddy Community, and I'm definitely appreciative of the work he's put into Caddy (along with others of course) and I hope some of negativity in this thread is able to be easily shrugged off by Matt, because I could imagine it can be exhausting to deal with when he genuinely does care and puts a lot of thought/effort into the responses he provides.

discuss

order

mholt|4 years ago

Thank you for sharing your experiences. Lots of positive feedback here has helped to offset the negative, so it's only a little exhausting today. :)