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

Incident with Github.com [resolved]

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#271

Post by malfist »

cyphar wrote: post #200
MallocVoidstar wrote: post #4

https://www.githubstatus.com/ It's all green which means it's working. Ignore the unicorn error on every page. edit: After 5-10 minutes they got around to opening an incident and (apparently manually?) marking the API as having 'degraded performance'.

I find it quite amusing what they seem to consider "degraded performance" to mean -- I guess if you really squint, your service not working at all is actually just very large latency spikes (until the service recovers) and thus can be labelled as "services experiencing degraded performance for a small portion of our customers".

Even better "degraded performance" doesn't seem to count against their uptime stats. Issues is labeled as "degraded" with 100% uptime.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#272

Post by Sanzig »

jeremyjh wrote: post #226
AlexandrB wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Luckily we already have a distributed version control system that can take over github Surprised that this wasn't just a link to Git. The biggest benefit of Git over predecessors was that it enabled decentralization. Github re-centralized the common case for the sake of convenience.

Yes but on Earth every project needs a canonical main branch. Most also need a way to manage and review changes to that branch that all project members have direct access to.

Gitea (and its popular fork, Forgejo) are very lightweight. You can easily stand up an instance on a cheap VPS.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#274

Post by pamcake »

anonymousab wrote: post #230
ieie3366 wrote: post #100

To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health

Allowing and accepting the LLM load is a willful choice they made and are making at the expense of their users, including their paying enterprise users. They could easily tighten things up in that regard, and make a choice that is right for their main users at the expense of The MS corpo mandate/mission. It is a choice to do otherwise.

Allowing and accepting? More like encouraging and instigating.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#275

Post by sharts »

ieie3366 wrote: post #100

To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health

It has nothing to do with load.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#276

Post by bogzz »

The GitHub failure unicorn image always brings me back to the good old days of trying out new Android ROMs. That unicorn used to be the logo of the Android Open Kang Project, which used to be my favorite ROM.

I wonder how it made it onto GitHub.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#277

Post by OtomotO »

nixgeek wrote: post #269
OtomotO wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just in the US. I have ONE European client... ONE of dozens who use GitHub. EVERY other client I've ever worked with used their own gitforge or at least bitbucket...

Selection bias then as the majority of European companies are for sure not hosting their own Forgejo or GitForge.

I've asked around in my circles, because I am genuinely interested: Everyone not working in startup space IS hosting their own instances.

Hell, even I do it.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#278

Post by ryandrake »

MoreQARespect wrote: post #250
noosphr wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily we already have a distributed version control system that can take over github: https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki I suppose people can use git too if they ever figure out how to send emails from a dedicated client.

There are plenty of alternatives for git hosting. The last thing which needs to be migrated before we get an exodus off this vibe coded monstrosity is reputation (i.e. github stars) which are inherently sticky.

Git doesn't even need to be "hosted" anywhere. That's the point of it being distributed. What needs to be hosted somewhere are all the barnacles (like issue tracking, code reviewing, CI, and so on) that have grown out around git, that people and businesses have become dependent on.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#280

Post by 6LLvveMx2koXfwn »

Waterluvian wrote: post #206
askonomm wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an overly optimistic view of things. For a lot of us GitHub is critical infrastructure, which if it goes down loses us and our customers money.

I'd be curious what the statistics might actually be for people who are directly affected because their business is suffering vs. people affected because their employer's business is suffering.

Most people's employment prospects are directly correlated with their employers ability to make money.
Post reply on HN