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

GitHub is down

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 108 posts

Re: GitHub is down

#71

Post by joshmanders »

doodlesdev wrote: post #62
joshmanders wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I blame the need for new shiny stuff. Ya'll make me laugh. Don't add any features and "This thing is dead, nothing new in years, find an alternative" But a company actively adds new features their customers are asking for and you're upset that they're adding new features. Pick a lane.

Curiosity: Not everyone in Hacker News has the same opinions.

Yet in every thread on HN when a service has an outage, the same opinion is spewed.

I know the comments of these posts before I even open them. HN is an echo chamber of predictability.

Re: GitHub is down

#72

Post by zdragnar »

Domenic_S wrote: post #52
dom96 wrote: post #42

The fact that GitHub being down can have such an impact means that Git’s decentralised features don’t go far enough. Why aren’t issues, PRs and all these other little things we depend on also stored in a git repo? Or something similar that can withstand GitHub being down. I set aside time today to go through my notifications and I can’t because of this. Notifications are trickier to decentralise but still, ugh.

heh, this was my argument back in like 2009 when everyone was all, "DECENTRALIZED!! We have to take months to migrate from SVN to git cause DECENTRALIZED!! You don't one a single point of failure do you?!" all I could say was, uhhhh github is a single point of failure. Unless you're mailing diffs around like Linus (which nobody I knew did), it's 6 of one, half-dozen of the other. there are lots of great things about…

If your SVN server went down, you couldn't even commit. At least with got, you can do everything as normal except push and pull, and that's only if you don't have multiple remotes (which, admittedly, very few GitHub users do).

Re: GitHub is down

#73

Post by manojlds »

paulddraper wrote: post #45
vb-8448 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on your needs and team size. For few tens of dev that need a versioning system with some sugar, a self hosted gitlab can acieve better uptime.

> a self hosted gitlab can acieve better uptime. Gonna call BS on that. It can achieve better uptime, if you ignore the downtime for upgrades, the downtime for configuration errors, the downtime when the disk fills up...

Most of the upgrades happen outside core work hours, which is easy to manage for smaller companies.

Re: GitHub is down

#74

Post by morsch »

leroy-is-here wrote: post #60
dom96 wrote: post #42

The fact that GitHub being down can have such an impact means that Git’s decentralised features don’t go far enough. Why aren’t issues, PRs and all these other little things we depend on also stored in a git repo? Or something similar that can withstand GitHub being down. I set aside time today to go through my notifications and I can’t because of this. Notifications are trickier to decentralise but still, ugh.

What do you even mean? Github made a decentralized service a centralized one by encapsulating it. This “impact” isn’t the fault of Git at all.

That's why he said that Git's feature set doesn't go far enough. Most projects need an issue tracker and a tool for discussing proposed changes. These things are out of scope for Git, but since people needed them, they congregated around a centralised service that builds around it. Of course, decentralised alternatives for issue tracking and pull requests exist, too.

Re: GitHub is down

#75

Post by manojlds »

leroy-is-here wrote: post #60
dom96 wrote: post #42

The fact that GitHub being down can have such an impact means that Git’s decentralised features don’t go far enough. Why aren’t issues, PRs and all these other little things we depend on also stored in a git repo? Or something similar that can withstand GitHub being down. I set aside time today to go through my notifications and I can’t because of this. Notifications are trickier to decentralise but still, ugh.

What do you even mean? Github made a decentralized service a centralized one by encapsulating it. This “impact” isn’t the fault of Git at all.

It is the fault of Git because it doesn't take it whole way. If the things I need to work are centralised then Git is not doing everything it should.

For comparison, check Fossil - https://www.fossil-scm.org/

Re: GitHub is down

#76

Post by joshmanders »

capableweb wrote: post #66
paulddraper wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a self hosted gitlab can acieve better uptime. Gonna call BS on that. It can achieve better uptime, if you ignore the downtime for upgrades, the downtime for configuration errors, the downtime when the disk fills up...

> It can achieve better uptime, if you ignore the downtime for upgrades, the downtime for configuration errors, the downtime when the disk fills up... Besides the last one, the others you can schedule when developers are not actually working on something, or give a headsup so developers can be prepared in case of errors. In the case of GitHub, Microsoft deploys changes whenever they want, whenever you want it or not.

> In the case of GitHub, Microsoft deploys changes whenever they want, whenever you want it or not.

That's because GitHub is used by millions of people every day all over the world. Business hours for them are around the clock. No matter when they update, if it breaks something, many people will hear about it regardless of when the break was deployed.

Re: GitHub is down

#77

Post by BossingAround »

bogantech wrote: post #44
roughly wrote: post #4

Hearts out to all the GitHub SREs who get to fix this, and all the SREs at GitHub’s customers who get to spend the next week convincing management and their peers that moving git in house won’t result in fewer outages.

Our on-prem GH enterprise hasn't gone down in the last year. Additionally any potentially disruptive work like upgrades etc can be scheduled outside of business hours so that they won't impact users

In general, paying GH tends to be much cheaper than employing a team of SREs that'll keep your on-prem Git instance up and running 24/7 (esp. including things like backups, disaster recovery, and similar good practices necessary for any enterprise-ready SaaS).

Something tells me that if you can schedule upgrades "outside of business hours", your scale is small (because in a global company, it's always "business hours" somewhere), which makes the cost argument even more prominent.

Re: GitHub is down

#78

Post by leroy-is-here »

morsch wrote: post #74
leroy-is-here wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you even mean? Github made a decentralized service a centralized one by encapsulating it. This “impact” isn’t the fault of Git at all.

That's why he said that Git's feature set doesn't go far enough. Most projects need an issue tracker and a tool for discussing proposed changes. These things are out of scope for Git, but since people needed them, they congregated around a centralised service that builds around it. Of course, decentralised alternatives for issue tracking and pull requests exist, too.

This is why Linus uses email. It’s the Unix way — Git is just another tool. It doesn’t need to be a website, and an issue tracker, and a change proposal database, and version control software, and a social media website, and pull request tracker. It just needs to be a version control software with some decentralization.

If todays developers were tasked to build the World Wide Web again, we would all log into some oAuth portal.

Re: GitHub is down

#79

Post by BossingAround »

dom96 wrote: post #42

The fact that GitHub being down can have such an impact means that Git’s decentralised features don’t go far enough. Why aren’t issues, PRs and all these other little things we depend on also stored in a git repo? Or something similar that can withstand GitHub being down. I set aside time today to go through my notifications and I can’t because of this. Notifications are trickier to decentralise but still, ugh.

> The fact that GitHub being down can have such an impact means that Git’s decentralised features don’t go far enough

Github was created to literally bring central server to a decentralized system. Yes, when that central server goes down, that's a problem for its users. It has nothing to do with Git.

You can, if you'd like, send Git patches in emails, or via snail mail, and you won't be influenced by any outages outside of individuals' laptops (which will affect only those individuals). Also, good luck managing your 250 microservices that way.

Re: GitHub is down

#80

Post by BossingAround »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #8
openthc wrote: post #2

Mine looks like (on git push): remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (4/4), completed with 4 local objects. remote: fatal error in commit_refs To $REPO ! [remote rejected] main -> main (failure) error: failed to push some refs to '$REPO' Status Page: https://www.githubstatus.com/ -- actually shows red -- it was almost updated as fast as HN.

> Status Page: https://www.githubstatus.com/ -- actually shows red -- it was almost updated as fast as HN. I think we should applaud this when it actually happens. Far too many services are terrible for this. While I'd rather the service not be down, it makes me feel a bit better if they don't lie about it.

It's funny when a company like Amazon, which many would think is on the cutting edge of automation, implements their status page as a manually updated static page.
Post reply on HN