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

GitHub Git Operations Are Down

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 271 posts

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#141

Post by Over2Chars »

jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

I don't see how self-hosting solves the problem of 3rd party vendors unless you're standing up a self-hosting solution as a hot/cold backup to your 3rd party vendor "in the event of an extended outage".

Kinda eliminates all those pennies saved (in theory) for outsourcing to "the cloud" if you have to duplicate your infra.

Hybrid has always seemed the most optimal approach, but there's always someone in charge who thinks spending money on safety nets is just wasted money.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#142

Post by Groxx »

lucasoshiro wrote: post #67
Groxx wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the same as not having one. Otherwise you can claim Facebook is distributed because you can email people links to Facebook pages.

> That's the same as not having one. That's the way the Linux kernel (the first Git repository) and Git [2] itself manage their codes. There's even a git send-email command, that prepare the commits as patches and send them following the using the correct template. [1] Linux kernel, IIO subsystem: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/ [2] Git mailing list: https://lore.kernel.org/git/

I agree that Git has more of a claim to this than Facebook, but that's kinda like saying a turtle is more of a car than a banana is a car.

Like, yes, it's true. Unlike a banana, turtles have 4 movement-enabling things, they use them to move mostly forward and backwards and not sideways, and other things can ride on them. It's probably more of a car. But it's not a car.

Git has no issue tracker. It's really not a controversial statement. The git community has common practices using something else to work around that, but if that's all you need to say "therefore git has X" then you can claim git has a CI framework because everyone and their dog uses GitHub. Which also has email integrations.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#143

Post by Over2Chars »

parpfish wrote: post #100
jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

but if you self host, how do you anticipate power outages and natural disasters? you shift it from a problem of software reliability to a problem of physical infrastructure. at some point in the chain somebody has to do that, but i'd prefer the person doing that was somebody with DEEP experience in it that could give you some nice confident assurances.

You're just using your own data center instead of Jeff's bit barn.

I mean seriously people, a "cloud" is just someone elses' data center.

Am I missing something?

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#144

Post by theteapot »

Over2Chars wrote: post #141
jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

I don't see how self-hosting solves the problem of 3rd party vendors unless you're standing up a self-hosting solution as a hot/cold backup to your 3rd party vendor "in the event of an extended outage". Kinda eliminates all those pennies saved (in theory) for outsourcing to "the cloud" if you have to duplicate your infra. Hybrid has always seemed the most optimal approach, but there's always someone in charge who thi…

Doesn't it exactly solve "extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors."?

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#145

Post by Idneedagun »

vrosas wrote: post #132
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: it's a 45 minute outage once in a blue moon. Very small price to pay for the convenience of a centralized VCS with many features that aren't easy to reliably set up in standalone installations.

Once in a blue moon? It’s like, monthly at best.

Well, despite our intents, we may have established the moon might be blue then.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#146

Post by hamandcheese »

Over2Chars wrote: post #141
jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

I don't see how self-hosting solves the problem of 3rd party vendors unless you're standing up a self-hosting solution as a hot/cold backup to your 3rd party vendor "in the event of an extended outage". Kinda eliminates all those pennies saved (in theory) for outsourcing to "the cloud" if you have to duplicate your infra. Hybrid has always seemed the most optimal approach, but there's always someone in charge who thi…

Since git is distributed, I wonder if it's enough to demonstrate the capability to spin up an alternative, but not necessary keep it up as a live backup 24/7.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#147

Post by theteapot »

macintux wrote: post #118
jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

The nice thing about git, from my perspective, is that if your entire hosted service vanishes, you can still reconstruct what you need from your users’ working directories. All of the important branches should be there. Somewhere. And any important integration branches that aren’t cached can be reconstructed. Of all the many dependencies on cloud services, git is by far the last I’d worry overly much about.

Git is only a small part of Github these days.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#148

Post by deathanatos »

macintux wrote: post #118
jcims wrote: post #88

Tangential at best but I work in a regulated industry and we're starting to get some heavy scrutiny from external auditors and regulators on the way we plan to address extended outages and forced exits from third party vendors. This goes beyond basic DR/BCP and plans are reviewed with at least a high level scenario exercise. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/06/09/2023-12... On the surface a product like…

The nice thing about git, from my perspective, is that if your entire hosted service vanishes, you can still reconstruct what you need from your users’ working directories. All of the important branches should be there. Somewhere. And any important integration branches that aren’t cached can be reconstructed. Of all the many dependencies on cloud services, git is by far the last I’d worry overly much about.

The source code, perhaps, but a good many of the orgs I've worked at also use Github for PRs, Actions (CI), and for triggering deployments. Those things take time to setup, and across a whole org, I wouldn't want to have to have an unplanned change to another vendor.

In particular, I've moved a CI for a large repository between different CI systems. It was anything but trivial: you want to believe "it's just a YAML that runs commands, right? Translate the format, right?" but it's really not; differences between how CI systems map commands to machines, external integrations (e.g., in this case, into Action's artifacts system, or output system) etc. all make it more complicated.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#149

Post by enasterosophes »

manfre wrote: post #94
freewizard wrote: post #62

It was down for ~2 hours. The status website claims "degraded performance", but in reality we get git@github.com: Permission denied (publickey). Either GitHub didn't know how to communicate, or they were not sure about the real impact. This is bad.

Status pages are rarely honest. The company will lie to salvage their SLA. "Degraded performance" or "some customers are experiencing an elevated error rate" should be interpreted as "service unavailable / outage"

I'm not convinced it's deliberate dishonesty. Just a communication disconnect. Firstly, it can take time from the first yellow flags to the full realization that there really is an incident underway, secondly it needs someone to decide how to communicate that incident, and thirdly the engineers who are actually working on the incident need to be able to get on with it instead of being pestered for an update every 10 minutes.

Re: GitHub Git Operations Are Down

#150

Post by umvi »

ascar wrote: post #131
eru wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually don't care whether it's centralised or decentralised, or who's managing it. But you are right that I want reliable and easy-to-use services. And centralisation is often one way to go there. As an interesting counterpoint: Git itself is decentralised and replaced centralised services like Subversion. And that made git easier to use, especially easier to get started with: no need for a server, no need to be…

And a `git remote add name url` and you are setup to use another remote server.

Only if your repo doesn't have any other critical integrations like CI/CD, jira, etc
Post reply on HN