Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think the issue is that there isn't much and certainly nginx could be viewed as competitor to F5. And with everything else going on it's not difficult to imagine that this acquisition isn't a positive sign.





Could it, really? I know that nginx has some builtin load balancing, but unless it's vastly vastly changed in the past few years, it's still a LONG way behind haproxy for load balancing.

nginx is an excellent high performance webserver, which is something F5 don't really have. It is (or was, at least) at best a mediocre load balancer, with all sorts of limitations at the sort of scales you'd usually use an F5 box for. While it's probably fair to wonder how much more work will be put into the LB feature-set of nginx, I hope that this will be counterbalanced by increased funding for the core feature of being a superlative webserver.


nginx's worse-than-F5-and-haproxy load balancing was great for where I was using it. And from all reports, F5 would have required a full engineer to do configuration, compared to about 1/4 of an engineer for nginx.

I would suggest that haproxy (which has a commercial version and appliance) are more of a competitor to F5.

NGinx is first and foremost a web server with excellent controls around caching. Haproxy is a load balancer with some caching as of version 1.9. F5 has always provided a web server in their load balancer via apache, but that is for management of the device itself. It can also serve up static web pages (primarily meant for error and landing pages).




Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: