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

171–180 of 266 posts

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#171

Post by darkwater »

maccard wrote: post #15
darkwater wrote: post #7

Glad that they released some data about new repo/issues/commits over the last years. It confirms what everyone else already believed from the outside: agents are putting a lot of extra, sudden pressure on GitHub. It's like a startup that is growing exponentially, with the difference that they already have a large user base to serve - and that keeps them in the bullseye - and probably a not-so-fast-moving organization…

What data is that? There's an unlabelled graph and a number at the current peak.

IMO it transmits the magnitude of the impact pretty well.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#172

Post by tracker1 »

matharmin wrote: post #143
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…

In many of my projects don't show any closed pull requests for the last 6 days. The CLI can list them, but anything going through search shows nothing. Their support acknowledged the issue, but has been silent since then, and the status page still shows nothing other than the potentially-related issue on the 27th. It looks like it has been resolved on some repositories in the meantime, but I still have the issue acro…

I'm not able to see the current release-please PR and the last one broke during release creation so aborted the deploy. Hoping today goes better, but limited expectations after yesterday and may be deploying manualy.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#175

Post by [deleted] »

sbarre wrote: post #49
cedws wrote: post #39

I wonder if they’ll end the free lunch we’ve been having since the MS takeover. There’s been a deluge of spam and crapware projects due to the LLM wave which is visible in that graph. Can’t see them sustaining being a public dustbin for low value projects forever.

I could see them expiring/archiving/deleting inactive projects after some time. I feel like this would have negative impacts (lots of interesting historical archives on Github) but maybe if a project hasn't been touched, or cloned, in some time, it just gets deleted with some notice.

[deleted]

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#176

Post by [deleted] »

rwmj wrote: post #132
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…

It's entirely possible the move to Azure has made the availability problems worse. Dedicated hardware is much more predictable than cloud. "Let's not move to Azure and instead buy a few more racks" was likely a decision beyond the pay grade of github's management.

[deleted]

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#178

Post by gattr »

graemep wrote: post #156
baq wrote: post #4

openai, anthropic, google and a plethora of chinese models all end up pushing code into github. you can discuss whether gpt 5.5 is better than opus 4.7, but for github it doesn't matter: they'll be receiving the code no matter which llm spits it out. amazing on one hand, quite scary on the other for github and all other forges if this continues and there is no reason why it wouldn't.

Simple solution: charge all users. Charge more for higher usage.

And/or provide a baseline free tier, corresponding to how much a typical human user would at most push/clone etc. They have pre-LLM statistics on that.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#179

Post by hobofan »

nextaccountic wrote: post #123
embedding-shape wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That sounds like the worst of both worlds? The Azure devision that can't even reliably can't provide decent infrastructure products based on their own data center trying to do the same one a bespoke data center.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#180

Post by AntiUSAbah »

rwmj wrote: post #132
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…

It's entirely possible the move to Azure has made the availability problems worse. Dedicated hardware is much more predictable than cloud. "Let's not move to Azure and instead buy a few more racks" was likely a decision beyond the pay grade of github's management.

I mean its Microsoft and its Azure. How much can go wrong clicking yourself a few/hundred non autoscaling normal VMs?

There is so much workload running on Azure, i never heard of VMs go away.

If Microsoft can source hardware for Azure, Microsoft can source hardware for Github.

Post reply on HN