Live data from Hacker News

Gitlab 11.8 Released

about.gitlab.com

41–50 of 57 posts

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#41

You know, there was a thread the other day about a new release announcement for some IDE. It was quickly removed, on grounds that the Hacker News FAQ says you shouldn't repost something " If a story has had significant attention in the last year or so ". I remember thinking that it was a real stretch to interpret different release announcements, separated by months, as "duplicate" posts. But this was coming from dang…

I think there's some understood weighting function based around familiarity and widespread use in the community.

In the beginning, I suspect pimping GitLab on Hacker News was tolerated because Y Combinator is an investor, and the company is viewed as potentially one of their home runs, with gazillions in returns. Further, there are many GL employees on HN who will promptly upvote or comment on submissions.

These days, GL is so popular that the echos of the early days continue. Self-fulfilling prophecy, achieved.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#42
post #2

Gitlab is great and I have used it for years but I recently switched to Gogs for self hosted repositories because it is much faster, easier to set up and walk in a park to maintain. It doesn't have all the features (bloat) that Gitlab has but it can probably satisfy >95% of git users.

Hello! Since GitLab is a single application that covers the entire software development lifecycle, we're a bit "bigger" than Gogs, which only tackles SCM. We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources, including forming a team to specialize in this area, and we're really grateful for your feedback. :)

Hi Suri, since we're here and talking about this I too would like to let you know that I'm actively considering alternatives to gitlab for this reason.

I originally started using gitlab because it provided a VCS with a really nice built-in CI system. Really, I wanted github + travis-ci, but selfhosted.

My experience with gitlab has been and still is really great, but I'm losing my grasp on what's going on on my own server. Every time I install a patch, I discover my gitlab instance has grown kuberentes support or serverless features or whatever auto-devops is.

I don't want, use or need all that, I'm the only person who logs into my gitlab instance. I'm pretty sure I've got it all turned off, but only pretty sure. If gitlab grows any more features I'll be moving away simply to ensure confidence that I understand my own infrastructure in the limited time I have to maintain it.

It's the weirdest kind of success problem to have, but the truth is if it wasn't such a pain to make the move, I'd have transitioned away from gitlab 6 months ago.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello! Since GitLab is a single application that covers the entire software development lifecycle, we're a bit "bigger" than Gogs, which only tackles SCM. We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources, including forming a team to specialize in this area, and we're really grateful for your feedback. :)

Hi Suri, since we're here and talking about this I too would like to let you know that I'm actively considering alternatives to gitlab for this reason. I originally started using gitlab because it provided a VCS with a really nice built-in CI system. Really, I wanted github + travis-ci, but selfhosted. My experience with gitlab has been and still is really great, but I'm losing my grasp on what's going on on my own s…

Thank you so much for sharing your experience. I hadn't thought of how frustrating it could be to not recognize your instance after each patch installation. This line, in particular, made me pause while reading: `I'm losing my grasp on what's going on on my own server.`

I created an issue to document your feedback, and I'll follow up with the product team to share your concerns. I really, really appreciate your candor, and I hope your comment sparks serious conversation and helps guide the new Memory team.

Issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/58100

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#44
post #15

Congrats on the new release! Since GitLab for Education was announced I've been trying to get our college signed up for it, but it's been difficult so I was hoping I might be able to share some GitLab for Education Requests: Working in a community college it's been really tricky to get the agreement signed for us to take advantage of this at all (that's more of an issue with the way we work in particular, but I just…

Thank you for the detailed feedback! We love to hear that we're doing something well, but also like to discuss if there is something that can be improved. > It would be nice if we could sign up for the licenses completely online without needing to wait and get an agreement signed That sounds reasonable, and it doesn't seem to be an issue only with your institution. We already have an issue for automating the applicat…

Thanks for the reply, I'll look into putting in an official issue request for it in [2] you shared but just to add on a bit...on our end we're really not developer oriented at all (I've put up a VisualSVN server quite a few years back and then put up a Gogs server about 3 years ago) and I'm pretty much the only person that uses it.

Our CS offerings are pretty minimal so even though I would love to see usage expanded there as well (teaching/using Git for instruction) the reality is it would be lucky if 50 students made use of Git during a given schoolyear since the offerings are that limited right now (and we don't generally get a lot of signups for those classes). It'd be awesome to expand our program and also create some sort of tie-in with Silicon Valley companies somehow (we're a community college in Southern California in a rural community so job opportunities for tech locally are really slim...so unless we built some sort of partnership for remote opportunities where people could stay local and have a good remote job people basically have to leave to other communities in different parts of the state to get work).

So going back to the staff side...I'm just trying to get our own IT staff onboard with using Git and hopefully start integrating more DevOps type things into our workflow, but it's difficult when you don't have the right tools available (or there's a pretty big cost to them). For example, I love the idea of us starting to create private containers but we need a container registry to do that and that's something GitLab could help us out with. The other main thing is the issue boards which I think we'd be able to make good use out of as well, but can't really test out those ideas at the present moment easily.

For Confluence, I don't have a ton of experience with it...the main thing is that at least one of the other community colleges that's a bit of a tech leader in the state is using it for their documentation stuff and the state's CCC Tech Center is using it too so that makes folks think it's the best solution to try out. To be honest right now though we're not doing a great job on documentation currently, even though we have a lot of other "low-hanging fruit" type options to be able to try out and just document things currently if we really wanted to do so (so what I'm saying here is that I don't think getting/implementing Confluence would actually solve our documentation issues here...but it would be nice if GitLab had a piece that you could point at as equivalent to Confluence that way people could be more comfortable with using it as a whole solution, rather than looking at that one capability as "missing" and discarding the entire solution because of it).

A response shared by the other college using it mentioned the following use cases that they used Confluence for:

- Team Project Sites District-wide (new and ongoing software implementations) - “Bookshelf” Searchable district-wide software documentation library (Banner, Onbase, DegreeWorks, Argos, etc.) - Technology “Knowledge Base” – district-wide searchable problem/resolution, FAQ - District IT Policies and Documentation - Development Team Private Documentation (Banner, Onbase, DegreeWorks, Argos, etc.) - Operations IT Team Private Documentation - And more!

In terms of web application development, I'm the only staff member really doing that currently...pretty much all the rest of our "development" work consists of our analysts writing database queries, with the occasional database view/procedure being written, but that's the team that I'd like to have to start using version control a bit.

Our Ops side of the house still needs a lot of work to get into the "DevOps" mindset, and I've been limited in the stuff that I can try out and experiment with as well (e.g. I've wanted to experiment more with Docker, but since we're a Hyper-V shop primarily understanding Microsoft's support of Docker has taken some time...plus moving into production is another stage, etc. and I basically have to sort out those new approaches on my own).

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve submitted it a few times, just because I use it and like it, interested in discussion about it. I don’t know if I agree with the rule (a whole year?), but I’ll stop submitting it.

Oh, to be clear... I'm perfectly HAPPY with release announcements, and believe that strict interpretation was ridiculous. I was simply taking issue with the inconsistency, arbitrary interpretation, selective enforcement, etc.

If the release isn’t noteworthy enough, wouldn’t the downvoted, or the lack of upvotes kill it anyways? I feel marking it as a dupe seems an unnecessary mitigation when these are the exact kind of things crowdvoting is really good at.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#46
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hello! Since GitLab is a single application that covers the entire software development lifecycle, we're a bit "bigger" than Gogs, which only tackles SCM. We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources, including forming a team to specialize in this area, and we're really grateful for your feedback. :)

> We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources I used to use gitlab at work daily and releases would mention how performance is being tackled consistently. However, I have not seen any large improvements at all, suggesting that there is an impenetrable wall made of the underlying technologies. Gitlab is based primarily on Ruby-on-Rails, which doesn't particularly shine with neither memory usage nor performance. W…

There has been a steady march of performance issues that have been made over the last few months that may not have been mentioned in the release post:

* 11.8: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=...

* 11.7: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=...

* 11.6: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=...

With regard to memory usage, we've made some progress there as well. For example:

1. We cut 80-100 MB/per Unicorn process by removing a dependency: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/21008

2. A change in our merge request processing in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/22725 lowered gigabytes of runtime memory from our worst and most commonly-used Sidekiq background job.

3. In the second-worst performing Sidekiq job, switching to a faster XML processor in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/23136 also dropped large spikes of runtime memory.

That being said, we still have a long way to go. I recently did an analysis to figure out, "Why does each Unicorn process take 400-500 MB RAM?" The note in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab/issues/4118#not... explains why. In short, there is truth that we're paying a price for Ruby overhead.

What can we do about it? I have several ideas:

1. Upgrade to Ruby 2.6 (significant memory improvements for free; see https://youtu.be/ZfgxvNUfQdU)

2. Replace many Unicorn processes with a multi-threaded Puma server

3. Continue profiling and optimizing inefficient code paths

4. Make the Ruby interpreter more efficient (e.g. with a compacting garbage collector, see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/54555)

5. Make Rails more efficient (e.g. https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/34711).

Lastly, there may be significant parts of the code base that will need to be rewritten to improve memory and/or performance. Gitaly is a prime example of this: many Git-related calls have been abstracted into a Go process.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#47
post #46
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources I used to use gitlab at work daily and releases would mention how performance is being tackled consistently. However, I have not seen any large improvements at all, suggesting that there is an impenetrable wall made of the underlying technologies. Gitlab is based primarily on Ruby-on-Rails, which doesn't particularly shine with neither memory usage nor performance. W…

There has been a steady march of performance issues that have been made over the last few months that may not have been mentioned in the release post: * 11.8: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=... * 11.7: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=... * 11.6: https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/merge_requests?scope=... With regard to memory usage, we've made some progress…

Thanks for putting that post together - that is very informative.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#48
post #2

Gitlab is great and I have used it for years but I recently switched to Gogs for self hosted repositories because it is much faster, easier to set up and walk in a park to maintain. It doesn't have all the features (bloat) that Gitlab has but it can probably satisfy >95% of git users.

Hello! Since GitLab is a single application that covers the entire software development lifecycle, we're a bit "bigger" than Gogs, which only tackles SCM. We have a plan to make GitLab use less resources, including forming a team to specialize in this area, and we're really grateful for your feedback. :)

I have been a GitLab CE user for several months now, hosted on my own server. And I agree the performance is not really good compared to GitHub. I know improvements like this is a huge challenge for you guys. But it’s been several years already since you guys said you are about to deal with performance issues.

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but Gogs is self-hosted whereas Gitlab offers hosting solutions.

I'm somewhat dumbfounded at the no-less-than-three sibling commenters here all chiming in with the same repeated misinterpretation of your post. I suspect those downvoting you didn't take time to read your comment properly either.

I blame the misunderstandings on the non-standard syntax: > Yes but Gogs is self-hosted whereas Gitlab offers hosting solutions.

Replying that, to someone who literally said they switched from GitLab to Gogs for self-hosted repositories, also made me parse it as implying one word: > Yes, but Gogs is self-hosted, whereas GitLab offers [only] hosting solutions.

but the author probably meant something like: > Yes, but Gogs is [exclusively] self-hosted, whereas GitLab [also] offers hosting solutions [so switching is not always an option].

Re: Gitlab 11.8 Released

#50

You know, there was a thread the other day about a new release announcement for some IDE. It was quickly removed, on grounds that the Hacker News FAQ says you shouldn't repost something " If a story has had significant attention in the last year or so ". I remember thinking that it was a real stretch to interpret different release announcements, separated by months, as "duplicate" posts. But this was coming from dang…

Ya, but gitlab is a YC company. So they aren't held to the same standard.
Post reply on HN