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

Days without GitHub incidents

dayswithoutgithubincident.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 178 posts

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#151

Post by Aurornis »

cnewey wrote: post #122
Aurornis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have. I skimmed your profile. Working on the infrastructure for a couple mid-tier video games is a cool accomplishment, but equating this to having solved GitHub level scale rings hollow. GitHub has a couple orders of magnitude more daily active visitors than the games you worked on had at their peak. You can make valid criticisms of GitHub without trying to reduce their scale or inflate your credentials to creat…

I'm not sure that resorting to personal attacks against the parent commenter for making a legitimate critique is the right, fair, sensible, or mature approach here. Discarding legitimate criticism based on some self-determined criteria of intellectual superiority isn't a good look. It smacks of elitism and isn't something conducive to a productive and positive community discussion. It is unhelpful, rude, condescendin…

Not a personal attack to fact check someone's claims.

I didn't bring their credentials into the conversation. They did.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#152

Post by falcor84 »

fragmede wrote: post #108
falcor84 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two options, either they are lousy at their jobs, or they are incapable of pushing back against unrealistic demands. Neither is a good indicator of their skill and talent as engineers. I know I am speaking from a position of some privilege, but I have previously left workplaces that did not allow me to practice good engineering, and I do expect others to do so.

Or, they've been given crap primitives to work with. There's only so much lipstick you can put on a pig. I don't know what database they're using or what their pub sub and streaming looks like, or even what their system diagram actually looks like. But, well, you don't see Google having these kinds of problems. Other ones, sure, but between Chubby and Spanner, if Google had bought GitHub we wouldn't be having these p…

But it wasn't a pig. It was a reliable system, and then it increasingly became an unreliable one, in a way that is not explainable by the mere increase in demand. Whatever rearchitecture was performed, it was done and is apparently being perpetuated by software engineers who should be held accountable. Not necessarily guilty, or even directly at fault, but accountable nevertheless. "I am just an employee of a bad company" is not a valid excuse for an engineer.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#153

Post by Aurornis »

dijit wrote: post #124
Aurornis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have. I skimmed your profile. Working on the infrastructure for a couple mid-tier video games is a cool accomplishment, but equating this to having solved GitHub level scale rings hollow. GitHub has a couple orders of magnitude more daily active visitors than the games you worked on had at their peak. You can make valid criticisms of GitHub without trying to reduce their scale or inflate your credentials to creat…

"false equivalence" needs an equivalence claim to be false. I didn't make one. The sentence after "I have" was literally "you could argue the scales are different." GitHub spent a decade asking the world to host its code with them. They got what they asked for. You don't get to beg everyone to run services for you for ten years and then have "scaling is hard" be the answer. They should be improving, not regressing ov…

> I didn't make one. The sentence after "I have" was literally "you could argue the scales are different."

Don't you at least see how it's misleading to respond "I have" in response to a question about scaling GitHub-scale services?

Trying to caveat it with "the scales are different" misses the point. The parent commenter was talking about scale.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#154

Post by saghm »

pluc wrote: post #135
saghm wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I'm concerned, any benefit of the doubt I might have had for Microsoft is gone after this debaucle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47989883

You must've been fuming at email clients for the last 20 years hijacking people's signatures eh?

I don't use any email clients that mess with signatures, so I think I'm fairly consistent here, yes.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#155

Post by llbeansandrice »

kedihacker wrote: post #3

I don't think aggregating the whole platform into one number is fair. It's like adding the whole aws into one number

From a user perspective this makes sense. But if you’re MSFT or GitHub this number is pretty embarrassing.

They would love if everyone on the platform used all of the features and had massive lock-in right? So if some part of that is always broken, it’s not a confidence booster for users to adopt more of the feature set.

Sure the more things you use the more likely it is that one has an issue but clearly stability isn’t a goal for these type of companies anymore.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#158

Post by baby_souffle »

reilly3000 wrote: post #16

This is a real business continuity issue for us. We’re kinda stuck with GitHub Enterprise but we may need to move from cloud to on-premises if this keeps up.

> We’re kinda stuck with GitHub Enterprise but we may need to move from cloud to on-premises if this keeps up.

Make sure you cache all the actions you need locally if you go this route otherwise it's not much of an improvement.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#159

Post by VirusNewbie »

falcor84 wrote: post #152
fragmede wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, they've been given crap primitives to work with. There's only so much lipstick you can put on a pig. I don't know what database they're using or what their pub sub and streaming looks like, or even what their system diagram actually looks like. But, well, you don't see Google having these kinds of problems. Other ones, sure, but between Chubby and Spanner, if Google had bought GitHub we wouldn't be having these p…

But it wasn't a pig. It was a reliable system, and then it increasingly became an unreliable one, in a way that is not explainable by the mere increase in demand. Whatever rearchitecture was performed, it was done and is apparently being perpetuated by software engineers who should be held accountable. Not necessarily guilty, or even directly at fault, but accountable nevertheless. "I am just an employee of a bad com…

eh...

https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/oct21-post-in...

They tried to scale MySql and turn it into Cassandra and then they lost customer data (that they claimed to later recover).

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#160

Post by VirusNewbie »

Aurornis wrote: post #103
dijit wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have. You could argue the scales are different, but computers are also faster now. So, argument to credentialism out of the way... What should we do as consumers if a provider that is a defacto monopoly due to network effects stops functioning? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47947719 https://www.linkedin.com/in/jharasym/

> I have. I skimmed your profile. Working on the infrastructure for a couple mid-tier video games is a cool accomplishment, but equating this to having solved GitHub level scale rings hollow. GitHub has a couple orders of magnitude more daily active visitors than the games you worked on had at their peak. You can make valid criticisms of GitHub without trying to reduce their scale or inflate your credentials to creat…

Ok, well, I work on systems quite a bit larger than Github, and I think they have a major reliability issue.
Post reply on HN