Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub is degraded/down

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#131

Post by ddevault »

saagarjha wrote: post #127
ddevault wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's to say? It's not GitHub scale, and even if everyone in this thread moved to SourceHut, it still wouldn't be GitHub scale, but it would be serving your needs just fine. I feel totally comfortable recommending SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact - even if we operate at different scales. And I believe sr.ht would beat out GitHub at th…

> Who's to say? And then you go on to say it. I'm glad that SourceHut exists, and I like many of its principles, and it's probably better designed too, but walking into a thread where someone is having an outage and then claiming that you'd do much better is in poor taste no matter how good you are or how many of your services work offline.

I responded directly to someone who said they were considering alternatives, and wouldn't've otherwise.

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#133

Post by bdcravens »

ddevault wrote: post #80
bdcravens wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you've done a great job building up your infrastructure, but if you have the level of traffic Github has, what would your uptime be?

Who's to say? It's not GitHub scale, and even if everyone in this thread moved to SourceHut, it still wouldn't be GitHub scale, but it would be serving your needs just fine. I feel totally comfortable recommending SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact - even if we operate at different scales. And I believe sr.ht would beat out GitHub at th…

> SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact

Most of us could throw any of the open source solutions on a $20 Linode instance and probably have excellent uptime. How many active repos do you host, and on how many servers?

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#134

Post by ddevault »

bdcravens wrote: post #133
ddevault wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's to say? It's not GitHub scale, and even if everyone in this thread moved to SourceHut, it still wouldn't be GitHub scale, but it would be serving your needs just fine. I feel totally comfortable recommending SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact - even if we operate at different scales. And I believe sr.ht would beat out GitHub at th…

> SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact Most of us could throw any of the open source solutions on a $20 Linode instance and probably have excellent uptime. How many active repos do you host, and on how many servers?

About 18K git & hg repositories, for about 13.5K users. We also run about 5,000 CI jobs per week, including for some large projects like Nim and Zig, Neovim, OpenSMTPD, etc. We have 10 dedicated servers at the moment. And I didn't throw an open source solution on these servers - I built these open source services from the ground up.

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#135

Post by SparkyMcUnicorn »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #79
ddevault wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're looking for somewhere else, SourceHut has had no unplanned outages in 2020, despite being kept online by an army of one. The software and infrastructure is just more resilient and better maintained. Our ops guide is available here: https://man.sr.ht/ops/ It's also the highest performance software forge by objective measures: https://forgeperf.org/ Full disclosure: I am the founder of SourceHut.

Sidebar, I just want to say, you are one of the few people I’ve observed doing actual “modern” web development. When most people talk about “modern web” or modern anything in software they think it means “using all the latest tools”. That often means things like ES6 and Webpack, which have nice surfaces, but which create nightmares under the hood. That’s the opposite of what modern architecture was. It was about embr…

Just wanted to interject that browsers (other than IE 11) have over 98% coverage for ES6 without transpiling.

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#136

Post by [deleted] »

ddevault wrote: post #131
saagarjha wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who's to say? And then you go on to say it. I'm glad that SourceHut exists, and I like many of its principles, and it's probably better designed too, but walking into a thread where someone is having an outage and then claiming that you'd do much better is in poor taste no matter how good you are or how many of your services work offline.

I responded directly to someone who said they were considering alternatives, and wouldn't've otherwise.

[deleted]

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#137

Post by ddevault »

[deleted] wrote: post #136
ddevault wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I responded directly to someone who said they were considering alternatives, and wouldn't've otherwise.

[deleted]

I'm referring to the commit to which I initially replied:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22935985

"...is it time to move away from Github?"

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#138

Post by rurp »

onion2k wrote: post #125
rurp wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Building skyscrapers is hard. Does that make it OK for them to fall down regularly?

GitHub hasn't collapsed killing thousands or needing to be completely rebuilt though, so that analogy doesn't work. This is more like there's a flood in the lobby so maintenance has closed the front door for a bit.

I didn't mean for the point to be about the consequences of the failure. What I was trying to argue against was the notion that it's fine for things to fail, just by virtue of them being hard. There are a lot of complicated systems in the world that work extremely reliably.

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#139

Post by bdcravens »

nimbius wrote: post #114
hellepardo wrote: post #2

Is it just me, or has Github's quality of service been continually degrading over the past several months? What is going on internally? Is this because of the Microsoft acquisition? Increased usage? An internal transition to Azure? ...is it time to move away from Github?

you could move to gitlab, but from what im hearing the pricing is higher than github (is this still true?) Barring that you always have the tried and true (and for some reason abhorred by start-ups) option of running your own gitea or gitlab instance. Its not hard, and most of this stuff can be done in dockerless containers if you want. If cloud servers are getting "overloaded" as some commenters say, you could even…

Github actually recently reduced their prices to match some of Gitlab's offerings.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867627

Re: GitHub is degraded/down

#140

Post by onion2k »

saagarjha wrote: post #129
onion2k wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub hasn't collapsed killing thousands or needing to be completely rebuilt though, so that analogy doesn't work. This is more like there's a flood in the lobby so maintenance has closed the front door for a bit.

Planes sometimes crash without killing people or needing to be completely rebuilt; that doesn't mean that this is clearly undesirable.

It's not a good thing that Github is down. It's an inevitable thing that comes from complexity at scale though. Hard things are hard, whether that's planes, buildings, or web apps.
Post reply on HN