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

Disabled at 22 million commits

programming.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 145 posts

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#11

Post by xen0 »

DocTomoe wrote: post #3

[flagged]

That's not how git works. Unless every commit changes every single file in the repo (without ever reverting to a previous state). Most repos don't work that way.

22 million commits is a lot though; the author states that the repo was over 8GB "last they checked", and the entire thing looked to be an experiment to determine "Github's or git's breaking point" - I guess they found it.

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#12

Post by xigency »

iBotPeaches wrote: post #7

> I decided to see how many commits GitHub (and git) could take before acting kind of wonky. At ~19 million commits (and counting) to master: it’s wonky. This just doesn't seem right to me. Why? Its obvious at some point you'll harm the service. If the goal was to test it, why not try locally with git.

A good lesson to learn - If you as a service owner aren’t testing the limits to the point of failure and enforcing sensible guardrails around that, then some random user eventually will.

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#15

Post by Kwpolska »

> I’ve also asked if they can re-enable it so I can give one more commit to say the final results on the readme then (public) archive it.

Entitled much? The author should be happy GitHub didn't just ban them for violating the ToS and intentionally trying to break things.

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#17

Post by housemusicfan »

MBCook wrote: post #9

So the author was purposefully trying to do the most extreme thing they could to see how git/GitHub act/break. I don’t blame GH at all. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20230702215522/https://sh.itjust...

So basically this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kzb6uf0U0k

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#18

Post by [deleted] »

ranting-moth wrote: post #14

More correct title would be "GitHub stopped abuse after 22M commits". There is absolutely nothing wrong with GH stopping that and it's very wrong to insinuate otherwise like OP is doing. Wouldn't be surprised if GH would permaban him.

[deleted]

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#19

Post by orf »

DocTomoe wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Many people have mentioned that this is incorrect, but I wanted to ask why you thought this?

The Linux kernel repo contains 1.1 million commits and 80k files on master. That would mean a naive total of 88,000,000,000 files being stored as a “full copy of the repository”.

Does this pass the smell test?

Re: Disabled at 22 million commits

#20

Post by eyelidlessness »

ranting-moth wrote: post #14

More correct title would be "GitHub stopped abuse after 22M commits". There is absolutely nothing wrong with GH stopping that and it's very wrong to insinuate otherwise like OP is doing. Wouldn't be surprised if GH would permaban him.

I don’t think the author is trying to insinuate that GitHub is in the wrong in any way. They explicitly say they understand the decision, and anticipated that it would happen.

I don’t want to quibble with the term “abuse”, because I think in this scenario it depends on whether intent is a factor and whether we should trust their stated intent. But depending on how you look at it, GitHub would be just as likely to benefit from hiring the author as they would from banning.

Post reply on HN