Live data from Hacker News

Slack was down

status.slack.com

221–230 of 243 posts

Re: Slack was down

#221
post #188
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such is the nature of slightly optimized Electron apps, T-Mobile Digits Desktop app is a similar resource hog. Using the browser based version often is less resource intensive.

Tried that, they actively employ darkpatterns to coerce users onto desktop apps. I even asked them to stop asking for an app install on their links that you open from inside the webapp and they told me to get stuffed and use the desktop app.

Strange, after declining message about "native" desktop app, I've never seen it again. No other issues as well. Firefox 69 on Windows, one paid and one free workspace.

Re: Slack was down

#222
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some other open Slack alternatives I know about include: Matrix[1]: maybe the most impressive. A chat _protocol_ with multiple server and client implementations, gateways to everything, and just out of beta. Zulip[2] (as mentioned), Rocket.Chat[3], Mattermost[4]---Slack clones. open source, developement open to pull requests to various degrees, can pay to have hosted in cloud or get support. Non-free or qualitatively…

None of these will: - "replace email" - "increase productivity" - "centralize communication" None of them. Not a damn one. I've worked at over 20 startups, there has never been a single case where any of these claims are true. They purchase one of these damn chat clients, and it becomes the biggest timesink the entire organization has every. single. time. But, you know what? You can't get rid of it. Everyone has it.…

Honestly, chat at an organization only seems to replace phone calls, and only partially. Which is not a bad thing, but I'm not sure it's even a good idea to try to replace email.

Re: Slack was down

#223
post #152
post #16

If you're a community driven project or organization using Slack, then take a look at https://zulipchat.com/ for something that sucks less, and is open source software. I've found it much more pleasant to use and less buggy than Slack.

Some other open Slack alternatives I know about include: Matrix[1]: maybe the most impressive. A chat _protocol_ with multiple server and client implementations, gateways to everything, and just out of beta. Zulip[2] (as mentioned), Rocket.Chat[3], Mattermost[4]---Slack clones. open source, developement open to pull requests to various degrees, can pay to have hosted in cloud or get support. Non-free or qualitatively…

Question about the requirements of those alternatives (and slack i suppose). Zulip for example says if you have > 100 users you need a machine with 4GB RAM and 2 CPUs. Why does a chat app need a lot of processing power? I guess most of the messages are simple text, and IRC could handle thousands of users ages ago. What is the processing used for ?

Re: Slack was down

#224
post #163
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, of course not. Neither adding some minor extra features (that make a huge difference for the end-user) nor profiting from it is bad. My concern was that there is so much good tech that is not being utilized just because it lacks enterprisey look and marketing attention. Take slack as an example: ircd with logging enabled + elastic search/sphinx/lucene + web frontend (use any existing web irc client and integrate…

> ircd with logging enabled + elastic search/sphinx/lucene + web frontend Slack is way more than that, though. My recollection is that even the initial version of Slack was more than that. At this point, it's enough that "let's extend ircd" isn't exactly a practical answer. Either they maintain their own incompatible fork of ircd or they try to force their business desires into the irc protocol. There's plenty of thi…

I don't use Slack, but I'm curious about which features make up the "more than that" part.

Re: Slack was down

#225
post #57

Slightly offtopic : As a remote engineer, I wonder if half-duplex voice (kind of like a CB radio) would be superior for communication vs typing everything? E.g. when I have an idea, I just talk, that comment is recorded and made available to the chat room. I'd like to get back some of the nuance of language that just isn't possible with text. There'd have to be some easy way of playing back the voice snippets in orde…

Discord's voice features are only really live and full duplex. Think more like party line / conference bridge than sending recorded snippets. There also isn't a built-in way to record such voice communications. That said, there are many other chat platforms which either support voice snippets in conversations (Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, Signal) or even are focused on sending voice snippets (Voxer, Viber).

Re: Slack was down

#227
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some other open Slack alternatives I know about include: Matrix[1]: maybe the most impressive. A chat _protocol_ with multiple server and client implementations, gateways to everything, and just out of beta. Zulip[2] (as mentioned), Rocket.Chat[3], Mattermost[4]---Slack clones. open source, developement open to pull requests to various degrees, can pay to have hosted in cloud or get support. Non-free or qualitatively…

Question about the requirements of those alternatives (and slack i suppose). Zulip for example says if you have > 100 users you need a machine with 4GB RAM and 2 CPUs. Why does a chat app need a lot of processing power? I guess most of the messages are simple text, and IRC could handle thousands of users ages ago. What is the processing used for ?

The Zulip server uses very little CPU, but the RAM is important. (I work on Zulip.)

Here's what the docs say, for reference (excerpt of https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/production/maintain-s... ):

> For an organization with 100+ users, it’s important to have more than 4GB of RAM on the system. Zulip will install on a system with 2GB of RAM, but with less than 3.5GB of RAM, it will run its queue processors multithreaded to conserve memory; this creates a significant performance bottleneck.

> chat.zulip.org, with thousands of user accounts and thousands of messages sent every week, has 8GB of RAM, 4 cores, and 80GB of disk. The CPUs are essentially always idle, but the 8GB of RAM is important.

As a practical matter, I think 4GB of RAM is not a lot to ask for a service that 100+ users are actually concurrently using all day. That's a small fraction of the RAM the clients are consuming; and you can get a suitable cloud machine from Digital Ocean (simpler pricing than AWS, so good for a quick price check) for $20 USD/mo.

On the implementation side, it turns out that a lot of moving parts go into a full-featured chat app. Here's a partial architecture diagram, plus detailed exposition: https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/overview/architecture... Database, plus caches, plus code for lots of features x running in a number of processes, adds up to a few gigs of memory.

Re: Slack was down

#228
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question about the requirements of those alternatives (and slack i suppose). Zulip for example says if you have > 100 users you need a machine with 4GB RAM and 2 CPUs. Why does a chat app need a lot of processing power? I guess most of the messages are simple text, and IRC could handle thousands of users ages ago. What is the processing used for ?

The Zulip server uses very little CPU, but the RAM is important. (I work on Zulip.) Here's what the docs say, for reference (excerpt of https://zulip.readthedocs.io/en/latest/production/maintain-s... ): > For an organization with 100+ users, it’s important to have more than 4GB of RAM on the system. Zulip will install on a system with 2GB of RAM, but with less than 3.5GB of RAM, it will run its queue processors multi…

Well my question is why they consume so much memory/CPU? What makes these services so different from earlier chat systems? Are these users continuously doing video chat with each other or keep sockets open? For simple text chat, 4GB of RAM seems absurdly high, considering how irc was able to handle thousands of users 3 decades ago.

Re: Slack was down

#229
post #170
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it is the first place I checked to verify my experience

I suggest https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/ , slack its own self, or https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/ or https://hosting.review/check-if-website-is-down/ or https://www.isitwp.com/uptime-checker/ . No need to fill this site with three or four postings with non-substantial comments.

Sites like that just check if the URL is reachable. They don't have any way of testing for API issues.
Post reply on HN