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

231–240 of 266 posts

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#231

Post by murkt »

bmitc wrote: post #225
panarky wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> entirely driven by price I might buy that argument if Azure compensated for its awful availability and security with lower prices. But the kind of person who buys Azure is the kind of person who buys Windows and Teams, perfectly happy to pay a premium for all the extra abuse.

It's curious how bad people say Azure is. I've never used it, but I've used AWS, and AWS is a gigantic mess. So that makes me concerned if Azure is worse than a gigantic mass.

Azure is worse. These series of posts were posted here not that long ago https://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporize...

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#233

Post by grogenaut »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #166
mijoharas wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, amazon (shopping, along with prime video e.t.c.) runs on AWS.

It was more "we built AWS to run our stuff and figured out we can sell it too". While Azure feels like Temu clone of Cloud

actually incorrect. They figured they could sell unused hardware retail didn't need during non-peak, and retail could become more scalable. They went off in a corner with uncle andy for a year or 2 and built the basics. Like 10 years later retail was actually using AWS and not something that pretended it wasn't on aws. MAWS (being on aws not bare metal) was like a 2012-2015 thing and took for ever for NAWS (native aws) to happen that wasn't apollo, tho amazon still loves apollo in many places. Kinda a dirty secret, retai wasn't on aws until after aws was really popular.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#234

Post by grogenaut »

malfist wrote: post #189
cmckn wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MAWS is “Move to AWS”, the name of the internal campaign to get legacy services into a somewhat-retrofitted AWS environment. It was a single VPC at one point.

I just finished a nearly five year stint at amazon and didn't realize there was pre-maws stuff still around. Never encountered any of it. I was like two months from my yellow badge but, uh, life is really better outside amazon.

many parts of AWS are not on AWS, and there's reasons to have bare metal but it's not as common and aws gives you good access in most cases.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#235

Post by danra »

When it's down to brass tacks, the most common GitHub action, actions/checkout, is not taking contributions due to "focus [...] on strategic areas" [0] despite having years-old issues - here's one[1] that soon celebrates its sixth birthday, despite having an available PR!

[0] https://github.com/actions/checkout#note

[1] https://github.com/actions/checkout/issues/270#issue-6289677...

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#236

Post by grogenaut »

jasoncartwright wrote: post #19
mijoharas wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, amazon (shopping, along with prime video e.t.c.) runs on AWS.

Prime video uses a non-AWS CDN when I watch football on it here in the UK

that's called load balancing and regional availability. many companies do multi-cdn. in fact it's smart to use multiple CDNs so you can do better in contract time. Twitch uses IVS but we have failover to other CDNs for very large events.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#237

Post by solatic »

bmitc wrote: post #225
panarky wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> entirely driven by price I might buy that argument if Azure compensated for its awful availability and security with lower prices. But the kind of person who buys Azure is the kind of person who buys Windows and Teams, perfectly happy to pay a premium for all the extra abuse.

It's curious how bad people say Azure is. I've never used it, but I've used AWS, and AWS is a gigantic mess. So that makes me concerned if Azure is worse than a gigantic mass.

Azure's management APIs break connections coming from outside Azure's network every time they use DNS to execute a blue/green swap on their public load balancers. Existing connections are not gracefully drained. Terraform state gets corrupted (it thinks the operation failed when it actually succeeded and the resource was actually created) and requires manual fixing.

This happened frequently enough at large enough scale we seriously considered building an automation to attempt to analyze the Terraform logs for the connection breaking and automatically import the created resource.

Azure support was completely worthless.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#238

Post by allthetime »

dangus wrote: post #217
madeofpalk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why do we need to be charitable to Microsoft? Did we lose our ability to consider them the evil empire?

There’s a lot of “won’t someone think of the GitHub employees” on here

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#239

Post by heisenbit »

johndough wrote: post #83
georgyo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are not the worst graphs in the world... Sure the bottom left axis is not labeled, but it still conveys the point correctly. The growth between 2023->2024->2025->2026 is growing quickly. And that in the end/beginning of 2026 they say more growth than the three years before, combined! You don't need to know the bottom left axis number. We do have to assume the graph is linear, and not some kind of negative expon…

> You don't need to know the bottom left axis number. We very much do. The graph suggests an insane growth in PRs from almost zero to 90M. Now compare this misleading graph with this much clearer one, which shows that the growth over the last three years has been less than 80%: https://github.blog/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/octoverse-202...

PRs were the culmination of human work. Now PRs are generated by machines to trigger human work. So the growth graph is not really absurd.

Re: An update on GitHub availability

#240

Post by skywhopper »

bmitc wrote: post #225
panarky wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> entirely driven by price I might buy that argument if Azure compensated for its awful availability and security with lower prices. But the kind of person who buys Azure is the kind of person who buys Windows and Teams, perfectly happy to pay a premium for all the extra abuse.

It's curious how bad people say Azure is. I've never used it, but I've used AWS, and AWS is a gigantic mess. So that makes me concerned if Azure is worse than a gigantic mass.

AWS is a complex mess, but it’s pretty good at delivering its services reliably. Azure is a mess that is also unreliable.
Post reply on HN