OWASP · Open source · Choosing owasp-opensource: I turned 5 options into a side-by-side comparison

1.8K
OWr/owasp-opensource·posted by zhou_yi·6 hours agoPostmortem

Choosing owasp-opensource: I turned 5 options into a side-by-side comparison

Most owasp-opensource articles stop at "how to use it" and never cover "when not to use it". This is an attempt at the second half.

On trade-offs, my view is this: if nobody on the team owns this area long-term, do not introduce a second mechanism. With two coexistence you first have to work out which one is even in play when things break, and that costs far more than the performance you saved.

// Minimal reproduction: you must use a real long-tail distribution here.
// Uniform load-test traffic will never trigger this.
func (s *Server) handle(ctx context.Context) error {
    conn, err := s.pool.Acquire(ctx)
    if err != nil {
        return fmt.Errorf("acquire: %w", err)
    }
    defer conn.Release()

    return s.do(ctx, conn)
}

The first thing was to collapse the variables. We were changing config and upgrading the version at the same time, and afterwards nobody could say which change caused what. We rolled back to moving one variable at a time, re-ran three times, and only then did the curve settle. Tedious, but not skippable.

Worth noting: the official docs do cover this, just in a very inconspicuous spot. I only found it reading the source comments, where the author explains the reasoning — roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

867 comments

867 comments

· first 120 loaded
M
Rran_bo·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

480
Bbob_chen·just nowedited

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

452
Bbob_chen·1 hour ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

151
Sswoole_lee·2 hours ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

436
Hhuang_ke·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

117
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

30
Hhuang_ke·1 hour ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

205
Lli_ming·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

46
Sslow_query·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

2
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

209
Llinlin·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

444
Rrase·yesterdayedited

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

433
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

1
Nnikic·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

169
Zzhou_yi·2 days ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

415
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

14
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

381
Cchen_dev·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

177
Llinlin·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

6
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

358
Llinlin·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

321
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

284
Zzhu_zong·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

279
Sslow_query·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

520
Ttang_hao·2 days agoedited

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

69
Cchen_devMod·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

18
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

1
Kkernel_panic·28 minutes agoedited

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

258
Llinlin·12 minutes ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

226
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

214
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

169
Kkite·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

31
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

14
Ttang_hao·yesterday

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

168
Sswoole_leeOP·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

101
Aalice_dev·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

157
KkiteOP·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

97
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

138
Kkernel_panic·2 days agoedited

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

134
Rran_bo·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

130
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

117
Zzhou_yiOP·2 days agoedited

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

491
Wwinter·2 days agoedited

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

240
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

488
Zzhou_yiMod·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

390
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

117
Oops_wang·3 minutes ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

115
Zzhu_zongOP·2 days agoedited

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

49
Lli_ming·yesterday

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

95
Lli_ming·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

94
Lli_ming·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

81
Sslow_query·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

73
Nnikic·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

69
Kkite·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

64
Zzhou_yiOP·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

1
Kkernel_panic·yesterday

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

55
WwinterMod·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

45
Ttang_hao·3 minutes ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

10
Sslow_query·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

41
Llinlin·12 minutes ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

37
Wwinter·12 minutes ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

35
Rrase·2 days ago

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

29
Hhuang_ke·yesterday

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

27
Zzhu_zong·2 hours ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

22
Hhuang_ke·just now

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

21
Zzhou_yi·2 hours ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

19
Rran_bo·2 hours ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

14
Oops_wang·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

10
Zzhou_yi·just now

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

5
Sslow_query·2 days agoedited

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

309
Bbob_chen·28 minutes ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

4
Sswoole_lee·28 minutes ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

93
Rran_boOP·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

295
Ddev_zhou·yesterday

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

287
Cchen_devOP·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

135
Sslow_queryOP·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

106
Zzhu_zong·2 days agoedited

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

129
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

44
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

69
Llinlin·2 days agoLevel 6

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

237
Llinlin·2 days agoLevel 6

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

2
Wwinter·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

8
Lli_ming·2 days ago

This matches what we see in production. We only hit it past 3k QPS; the earlier load tests showed nothing — the test traffic was too clean, with no long-tail requests.

2
Sswoole_lee·2 days agoLevel 6

Has anyone run a controlled experiment? I did, reducing it to a single variable, and the difference was 4% — within noise. So I suspect the main cause is something else.

1
Ttang_haoMod·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

4
Sslow_query·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

3
Kkite·2 days ago

Saved. I am reworking this area this week — this saves a lot of wrong turns.

2
RraseOP·2 days ago

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

14
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

2
Rran_bo·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

425
Llinlin·yesterday

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

1
Zzhou_yi·just now

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

238
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

122
Mmike_xu·2 days ago

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

22
Ddev_zhouMod·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

1
Zzhu_zong·2 days agoLevel 6

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

239
Wwinter·2 days agoLevel 6

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

1
Ttang_haoMod·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

1
RraseMod·2 days ago

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

37
Mmike_xu·2 days agoedited

Worth learning from this debugging approach. We went straight at the logs and took a much longer route.

486
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

1
Kkernel_panic·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

16
Rrase·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

127
Ddev_zhou·2 days ago

A question: what changes in a container with a 512Mi memory limit? That is how we run it in production.

28
Sswoole_lee·2 days ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

368
Rran_bo·2 days ago

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

508
Oops_wang·2 days ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

495
Rran_bo·2 days ago

I just read the owasp-opensource source — the author actually explains the reasoning in a comment, roughly "so that it degrades into predictable behaviour in extreme cases".

219
Nnikic·2 days agoedited

I see point 3 differently. The trade-off depends on your read/write ratio: read-heavy with little writing means caching actually widens the inconsistency window.

3
Bbob_chen·2 days ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

2
Rrase·2 days ago

This is not a owasp-opensource problem, it is a usage problem. The docs say this API is not thread-safe and you must lock around it yourself.

101
Hhuang_ke·2 days agoedited

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

1
Ttang_hao·2 days ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

4
Oops_wang·12 minutes agoedited

Thanks for sharing real numbers — far more useful than the articles that only cover concepts.

492
Nnikic·3 minutes ago

We have run this in production for two years without hitting it. That said, we never reached this scale, so our experience is not really evidence here.

249
Oops_wang·2 days ago

One counter-example: below owasp-opensource 7.4 the semantics of that code are different, so do not copy it verbatim. We got burned in staging and rolled back once.

8
Rran_bo·12 minutes ago

Agreeing with the above. One addition: with this option enabled the GC count in your metrics doubles, so adjust the alert threshold at the same time or it will keep firing.

1
Ttang_hao·2 days agoedited

Can you give a minimal reproduction? I ran it locally for ten minutes and could not reproduce on macOS with the latest version.

1
Oops_wang·2 days ago

There is actually a simpler fix that needs no architecture change: move this check up to the gateway and the problem disappears. The cost is one extra lookup at the gateway.

1
Ttang_hao·2 days agoedited

Sharing our numbers, 8 cores 16GB, same scenario:

| Concurrency | P50 | P99 |
|---|---|---|
| 200 | 12ms | 88ms |
| 500 | 31ms | 340ms |

P99 clearly collapses at 500 concurrency, which lines up with your knee point.

1

This is the post detail page /en/c/owasp-opensource/post/p13. Posts and comments are generated deterministically from a seeded PRNG, so the same post always renders the same content and the link can be shared, reloaded and indexed. In production this page reads MySQL for the post, Redis for hot-post caching, and fetches the whole comment tree in a single query on the path column.

See the database schema →