text stringlengths 0 1.8k |
|---|
**Gerhard Lazu:** Yeah, it makes sense. I think a release calendar makes sense from the perspective of communicating what to expect, and when. If you know that, for example, you're going to ship a new minor in (let's say) three months, or six months, and then there will be a feature freeze in five months, any new contr... |
\[32:12\] And who knows, maybe someone else will have another idea and say "Hey, have you thought about this?" And then that contribution becomes even more amazing, because it's being discussed and it's been out in the open for a while longer before the final implementation lands, in a shipped minor. So that makes sens... |
So what would make Traefik bump to a major version? We know how minors get bumped... What would Traefik make it bump from v2, which is currently, to v3? |
**Emile Vauge:** In our minds -- I mean, as soon as a new feature leads to not being backward-compatible, it has to be in a major. As soon as we need to do major changes in the architecture itself, this leads to a major release... So this kind of stuff. This makes a new release necessary, or this makes this kind of fea... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Okay. So let's imagine that you have a big feature coming up, which - maybe it's a new feature, like it doesn't change anything, but it's a big difference in how the software behaves. Would you put that in a major, or would you ship that in a minor? |
**Emile Vauge:** In a major. If it's something big, that changes the way the software behaves, definitely a major. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Okay. Even if it is backwards-compatible, it doesn't really matter, because it's significant enough to deserve its own major. Okay. |
**Emile Vauge:** Yeah, yeah. Because it could have some side effects on many aspects, because it's extremely complex to -- now Traefik has become kind of complex, and as soon as you change significantly the architecture or something inside Traefik, it will have some side effects. So it could be kind of crazy to do that... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Yeah, I'm with you. I'm with you. So if you can't tell by now how passionate I am about releases, shipping, you're just about to find out... If you can't tell by now. How do you apply semantic versioning in Traefik to, for example, config, or plugins, or even like the API? What does semantic versionin... |
**Emile Vauge:** That's a good question, but for example on the API, between two minor releases, the only thing that we accept additions to the API. No changes, only additions. So if you have new features with additional, for example, parameters in the API, that's fine, because it's perfectly backward-compatible, so th... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** What if the behavior of an internal component changes? Is that the public API? Something just doesn't behave the way it used to because you've made the change... But the API hasn't changed; it's just the behavior changed. |
**Emile Vauge:** It depends, to be honest. There is no definitive answer. Sometimes we change some of the behavior, but it's on purpose, because for example it's fixing something, so that's fine. But if it changes the behavior and if it could lead to unexpected things to users, then we don't do it. Or we do it, but add... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** A feature flag. |
**Emile Vauge:** A feature flag, or something. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Yeah, that makes sense. So when we say Traefik's API, what I understand by that is how things get configured and discovered, so how Traefik does it. That's my understanding. Are we thinking about something else when we are talking about the Traefik public API? |
**Emile Vauge:** \[35:49\] We also expose a REST API to update or change the configuration. So we have, I guess, what we could call a real API... But yes, typically we have an API, but we can also configure Traefik through a configuration file, through annotation in Docker, or whatever, through a configuration file on ... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** All those are APIs. |
**Emile Vauge:** Yeah. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** What about the plugins? What about the APIs and the plugins used to integrate with Traefik? The providers, or -- I think you call them providers, right? |
**Emile Vauge:** We have a different type of plugins, in fact. We have provider plugins... And what is a provider plugin? If you want to integrate Traefik to a new orchestrator, for example, you will need to write a provider plugin. So the provider plugin will be a -- we need to connect to this orchestrator, or get som... |
Right now, the plugins integration is extremely new. It has been here with local plugins in the 2.5, and plugins themselves are here in the 2.x branch... So we don't have from now any strong versioning mechanism inside plugins, but we have started to -- we already have a framework here to implement that in the future. ... |
But for example, you have two ways to use plugins inside Traefik today - you can use plugins that are on our marketplace, so that are published on our marketplace, and you can use private plugins. So with private plugins you can do whatever you want. No version check whatsoever. You are free. And of course, if you use ... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Okay. That makes sense. But the plugins - do they use some APIs that Traefik exposes, and are those APIs part of your public API? Because that's like Go code, right? From the perspective of Go code, those interfaces - are they part of your public API that must be backwards-compatible between minors? |
**Emile Vauge:** Absolutely. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Perfect. It makes sense. Again, for some projects I know it doesn't make sense, but I think this is important, because I just wanna know where you stand. And again, I love it. |
**Break:** \[38:43\] |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Changelog.com is a traditional three-tier monolithical application that runs on Kubernetes. We have a proxy in the front, we have the app itself, and we have the database. Fairly standard. One thing that we have been noticing - or I have been noticing, to be precise - is that we have some long-tail la... |
I'm wondering, if we were to use Traefik as a proxy, could it help us understand a little bit more why the requests are slow? At least from the proxy perspective. |
**Emile Vauge:** One of the biggest pain points of users with microservices platforms -- so microservices are bringing so much to developers and to DevOps, whatever; but they are also bringing complexity. And finding the root cause of an issue is always kind of difficult, and could be a nightmare. So to answer your que... |
But sometimes it's even more complex. Sometimes the requests are slower inside the reverse proxy. You have a few requests that are so much slower; it could be a nightmare. One of the reasons, among others, is that some requests are using an older version of TLS. For example - but just an example - which implementation ... |
But there is no magic. If you only have ten requests over a million which are slower, Traefik won't tell you "Hey, this is the reason why those ten requests took some time." You will need to find the root codes of that with the help of Traefik. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** That is super-helpful, and what I do know is that our 99th percentile is a lot higher than our 95th percentile. So 95th, as I mentioned, 300 to 400 milliseconds. 99th, sometimes the spikes go as high as 40, 50 seconds. And that's what I need to understand - why does the 99th percentile from a proxy pe... |
You mentioned something really interesting around services, and I'm wondering if you're thinking services from a Kubernetes perspective, or services from the perspective of putting Traefik in front of, for example, the database, so that requests -- because I know Traefik can proxy TCP requests. So is that what you're t... |
**Emile Vauge:** Yeah, exactly. Services as a generic term. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Okay. |
**Emile Vauge:** So in front of your application services, like Kubernetes, but also in front of your database. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Okay, that's really interesting. And are there CRDs that I would use? How would I configure this in the context of Kubernetes for Traefik? |
**Emile Vauge:** It depends. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** It depends. Okay. |
**Emile Vauge:** Yeah. If you want to do this in front of your database -- specifically, it depends on how you are deploying your database, is it inside Kubernetes or not? |
**Gerhard Lazu:** It's just \[unintelligible 00:43:59.00\] |
**Emile Vauge:** \[44:01\] Yes. So if this is the case, you need to have something that handles the tracing in front of your database. I mean, it depends on the database. Some databases have some integration with those tracing systems, some don't. In this case, you need to have something in front of that. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Yeah, that makes sense. Okay. And can Traefik be the something, or would it need to be something else. |
**Emile Vauge:** No, you can also use Traefik. So in that case, it wouldn't be an Ingress controller, I guess. It would be a bit different. But yes, it could be that. |
**Gerhard Lazu:** Interesting, okay. I'll check it out. That's really interesting. Okay. So David and Marques, I know that you're not listening to this, because this will come out after we record, but just to let you know, I was thinking about this just before we did the recording. Okay. |
So this is our own very specific problem, but I'm sure that you have a much broader perspective on the Traefik community. What other big problems are you seeing in the community, and what are you thinking about them, or how are you thinking about them? |
**Emile Vauge:** This is the big question, because with Traefik we are talking about a really small \[unintelligible 00:45:02.06\] in the networking space. It is a reverse proxy thing, or the Ingress controller. But it's tiny. The networking space is so much bigger. And in fact, we've found that with the rise of micros... |
Another interesting aspect we discovered is that we do think that in the future, now that Kubernetes has won the orchestration war - there is no word on that, right? Companies are either testing, or migrating, or already using Kubernetes in production today, and they will be using Kubernetes even more tomorrow. |
The big pain point that we are seeing coming is the number of Kubernetes clusters is just going to grow exponentially. It's already difficult to manage one Kubernetes cluster, but imagine if you have to manage ten or a hundred. It's crazy. And today what do you have to handle a hundred Kubernetes clusters? Nothing. You... |
**Gerhard Lazu:** That's a really interesting perspective, because you're right - we ourselves only have one, and we're possibly the smallest team you could have; just a few people. Now, I'm already thinking of having another one. Like, a \[unintelligible 00:47:18.28\] cluster that manages all other clusters. So I'm wo... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.