Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

runtimewire.com

21–30 of 83 posts

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#21
post #14
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI has 100x'd our productive capacity such that we're moving at unforeseen speeds at digging holes and refilling them!

This is too generous, they aren't even filling in the holes.

It’s filling in a lot of the holes, but it’s putting a very convincing paper cover over the ones it misses. So it’s very hard to find the ones it didn’t fill, better hope your most valuable customers don’t walk over the paper ones!

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#22
post #20
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems very reasonable, from my use. I commit much more often, as checkpoints, with branch rules that prevent force pushes/deletions, so the agents can't delete anything. And, suspect MS is only counting commits, and not the eventual squashes to one commit.

And every checking runs a whole CI run? We had it internally with our teams that open a PR to then push like 10-20 more commits but never actually interested in the client builds etc. turned out they opened the PR as a checkmark/ way to share the current state. We set cooldowns and auto cancel for the ci. And then there is the developer who uses the CI compute to run tests instead of running them locally for various…

[deleted]

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#23
post #20
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems very reasonable, from my use. I commit much more often, as checkpoints, with branch rules that prevent force pushes/deletions, so the agents can't delete anything. And, suspect MS is only counting commits, and not the eventual squashes to one commit.

And every checking runs a whole CI run? We had it internally with our teams that open a PR to then push like 10-20 more commits but never actually interested in the client builds etc. turned out they opened the PR as a checkmark/ way to share the current state. We set cooldowns and auto cancel for the ci. And then there is the developer who uses the CI compute to run tests instead of running them locally for various…

Nope. You can configure CI to not run for every commit of every branch (seems insane to have full CI for every commit, unless you don't allow your devs to push until done with something, which also seems insane).

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#24
post #16

So this is an Hotmail moment?

Is this in reference to something that should be linked for those not alive or in the know at the time?

I'm not sure if it was entirely true, but there are stories that after Microsoft bought Hotmail in the mid-90's, they quickly attempted to move them from FreeBSD (?) to Windows NT. But it failed miserably, and they went back to the original stack for another ~decade.

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#26
post #2

> commits were on pace to hit 14 billion in 2026, up from 1 billion in 2025 So AI means 14x the checkins? That's not 14x features completed, but still... wow.

That commit count alone should not become any problem for infrastructure, even for Azure. They probably developed some ungodly mess with actions that did not/could not translate very well on Azure infrastructure.

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#28
If there’s one thing that surprised me at AWS during my time there - over a decade ago now - that I was not clearly expecting in advance, it was the scale and competence of the units fulfilling the colossal and unceasing growth in capacity demand.

This led me to reconsider Amazon as a whole, and I still think of it basically as a logistics firm, with the shop and the public cloud merely a monetisation thereof.

Re: Microsoft turns to AWS as GitHub faces AI capacity crunch

#29
post #16

So this is an Hotmail moment?

Is this in reference to something that should be linked for those not alive or in the know at the time?

Maybe this from 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/aug/01/microsoft...
Post reply on HN