[apta]

> something Java, C and other languages failed at before Go was introduced.

Java's concurrency solutions are just as good, if not better than golang's. Pair that with libraries such as RxJava and you're definitely ahead. I don't see what golang has to offer in that area that the JVM doesn't

[sebcat]

Sounds believable, but at the time we were stuck at 1.6 and had a significant drop in traffic due to JSSE and non-existing support of "modern" TLS Cipher Suites and TLS extensions (we even had problems with SNI, years after introduction)...

We were using C because epoll made it possible for us to compete, but the Java reactivex stuff were lagging behind.

[apta]

Moving to a completely different language and platform was easier than moving from Java 6 to Java 8? Why were you stuck on 6 otherwise?

[dagenix]

Go may very well have been through best fit for you. However, saying that Java's problem was that you couldn't upgrade from 1.6 yo 1.8 but you could introduce a completely different language doesn't make much sense to me.

[_-david-_]

Why couldn't you have just put a reverse proxy in front of your java?

[baby]

But then you have to write java

[cweagans]

You don't have to deal with the jvm for one thing. Java for another.

Both of those things are selling points for me.