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

An update on GitHub availability

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 266 posts

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#121

Post by BlackFingolfin »

embedding-shape wrote: post #96
BlackFingolfin wrote: post #74

GitHub stability has been bad for me. And recently even the data they show me in the web has been unreliably. Since yesterday, me and several colleagues noticed that the pull request lists on the website are incomplete, across many repositories. For example, on https://github.com/gap-system/gap/pulls it says "Pull requests 78" in the "tab list", but the PR list view reports "35 open" (the number 78 is correct, and co…

> For example, on https://github.com/gap-system/gap/pulls it says "Pull requests 78" in the "tab list", but the PR list view reports "35 open" (the number 78 is correct, and confirmed by e.g. `gh pr list`) Surely a scaling hack where they use "estimation" queries that return "kind of right" results instead of 100% correct data, as it's less load on the infrastructure. Not necessarily a bug as much a shit choice from…

If the numbers were all that is wrong, that'd be OK. But it fails to list all data -- so the only way to navigate to the missing PRs is to know their number, and manually inserting the right URL (or to go to another PR, and then edit the URL in the navigation).

Sorry, but I don't think there is any way this can be classified as "not actually a bug"

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#123

Post by nextaccountic »

embedding-shape wrote: post #65
jasoncartwright wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty sensible to not rely on a single provider for their large complex system?

Man, you should have been there 6 months ago when they decided to start tearing down GitHub's own data centers and move everything exclusively to Azure. Seems they themselves realized this after they started moving, but imagine if you could have helped them realize this before they even started :)

Made me think. Why not convert Github datacenters into Azure datacenters that have Github as their sole customer?

Then it's up to Azure how they will manage this

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#124

Post by Waterluvian »

I have a hard time believing anything what's said in a blog post where a graph lacks axes labels/scale. It tells me that nobody who cares about correctness had any say on the content of the post. Maybe I'm being 8am cranky and pedantic, but I'm sticking with it.

> availability first, then capacity, then new features.

I'd love to experience first-hand a leadership team who says, "stop accepting new paying customers until we've got availability sorted out!"

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#126

Post by GS_Projects »

The bit nobody covers in these write-ups: small teams without dual-cloud failover budget. Last big GitHub outage cost me a deploy day. Not catastrophic but the kind of thing you don't budget for when GitHub is your single source of truth.

Status page is also still doing that thing where every component is green but in practice clone is hanging, push is timing out, actions are stuck. Per-service uptime is a managed number. The user-experience number is the one that matters and it's not in the post-mortem.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#127

Post by ncruces »

embedding-shape wrote: post #31

Hah, love that now they say "Our priorities are clear: availability first, then capacity, then new features" when 6 months ago, it was seemingly exactly the same except Azure supposedly was gonna save them: > GitHub Will Prioritize Migrating to Azure Over Feature Development - GitHub is working on migrating all of its infrastructure to Azure, even though this means it'll have to delay some feature development. > In a…

> So the currently delayed feature development is now gonna be further delayed, yet almost every week we see new features and changes, just the other day the single issues view was changed, as just one example.

They did that as a panic mode hack to mitigate performance: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47912521

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#128

Post by madeofpalk »

embedding-shape wrote: post #31

Hah, love that now they say "Our priorities are clear: availability first, then capacity, then new features" when 6 months ago, it was seemingly exactly the same except Azure supposedly was gonna save them: > GitHub Will Prioritize Migrating to Azure Over Feature Development - GitHub is working on migrating all of its infrastructure to Azure, even though this means it'll have to delay some feature development. > In a…

This seems uncharitable. Priorities aren't exclusive, especially at scale across large engineering orgs like GitHub. It could be that these are the top level priorities, but teams or individuals who aren't able to contribute to these priorities will work on other things like new features.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#129

Post by jmbwell »

torben-friis wrote: post #62

Not enough attention is being put in the production/delivery mismatch. GitHub is claiming they require 30x scale due to the giant increase in repository creation, PRs, commits, etc. I have not seen a single product increase in features or quality as an end user, nor new significant products have come out in this period (other than the LLMs themselves). Where is all this code going?

I understood it to mean, GitHub is being crushed by LLM/AI/Agentic code review and submission, not GitHub’s code itself

What I’m not seeing here but I am seeing with the Linux kernel is, most of the automatically submitted code is irrelevant or not useful

(Maybe that’s what you were getting at, apologies)

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#130

Post by malfist »

mijoharas wrote: post #117
ksimukka wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was at AWS, retail was not yet running on AWS. Has that changed? Prime video does use some AWS services, but live and on-demand are two entirely different beasts.

Really? I thought retail was. It's been almost a decade since I worked at prime video but I think everything was running on AWS. (Some things didn't use brazil etc, but I think all the servers etc. were on AWS)

It's a distinction without a difference. All new development is nAWS (native AWS) legacy is mAWS (not sure about the acronym) which is still AWS under the hood and is mostly just a pool of EC2 instances with preconfigured networks. Nothing made in the last five or six years is on maws, and amazon is a micro service shop so things are always being built new. If you joined today there's a good chance you'd join a team without any maws infra
Post reply on HN