| 1 |
On 2022-01-18 22:17, Grant Taylor wrote: |
| 2 |
> Age of something doesn't mean a lot. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> - TCP/IP is from the 80s and yet we are still using it. |
| 5 |
> - OSI is newer than IPv4. |
| 6 |
> - IPv6 is newer than IPv4 and OSI. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Yet we are still talking about the venerable IPv4. |
| 9 |
Age migth mean a lot when we are talking about software. Modern software |
| 10 |
usually is easier to configure, has sane defaults, more secure and has |
| 11 |
integration with other modern software. And is much more popular in the |
| 12 |
community meaning better support. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> I view adding /additional/ software / daemons as poor form, especially |
| 15 |
> when the /existing/ software can do the task at hand. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I'm was not talking about adding software, I was talking about replacing |
| 18 |
software. Time saved in managing complex software that does a simple |
| 19 |
task can be applied elsewhere. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
In regards to "already having a software" most modern applications don't |
| 22 |
require "having" them. It works out of the box, usually with one command |
| 23 |
and you can switch parts of your infrastructure without pain thanks to |
| 24 |
containers (or statically linked binaries in golang and rust) without |
| 25 |
downtime (if done right). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> Don't overlook the port conflict. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Dynamic ports with service discovery == no port conflicts. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Why start the email asking why something old is used and then finish |
| 32 |
> the email suggesting the possibility of using something else old? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Not that old as apache. Nginx is still widly used (contrast to apache), |
| 35 |
but is being replaced by caddy/traefik. Apache is ancient and I've never |
| 36 |
seen it running in production. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Nginx is from the same (premicroservice) age as apache and will probably |
| 39 |
we easier to understand than something like Traefik. |
Archives