391–400 of 451 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My company is migrating repositories over to a self-hosted forgejo instance, currently very jealous of the engineers working on those migrated repos.
Beware, CodeBerg (ForgeJo creators) has forbidden AI & crypto: https://hackaday.com/2026/07/24/codeberg-bans-cryptocurrency...
No-one's stopping you hosting your own projects.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My company is migrating repositories over to a self-hosted forgejo instance, currently very jealous of the engineers working on those migrated repos.
Beware, CodeBerg (ForgeJo creators) has forbidden AI & crypto: https://hackaday.com/2026/07/24/codeberg-bans-cryptocurrency...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are these outages caused by introduced bugs, though, or by load issues? As someone who has spent many years working in high load environments, this is not an uncommon pattern. You design a system and it works great. It can handle failures, load spikes, it is horizontally scalable, things are great. You think you figured it out. And then load keeps increasing and you suddenly hit a tipping point where everything keeps…
There was a great article awhile back that shed some light on just how dysfunctional azure is as a platform: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242 If I had to guess it's because Github is sitting on top on infrastructure held up by toothpicks and duct tape
All of the outages make sense to me as scaling issues. Each month, GitHub is getting the amount of commits they’d normally get in a year. And it’s growing > Yup, platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.) GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week in 2023 to 1B minutes/week in 2…
Back of the envelope math, if anyone wants to correct my mental model: 2.1B (min core)/week ~ 300M (min core)/day. Assuming ~300k cores (~3k physical server CPUs, seems fine), that's 1k min/day. Seems about right, though obviously not uniformly distributed. In any case, the number I'm focusing on here is the 300k cores part (x2 if you're counting in vcores). It does not seem like too much to ask for (significantly) m…
1MW ~ 6700 NYC citizens' residential usage, apparently, lol. I don't know exactly why, but that citizen number seemed a surprisingly large (well, probably because I've played with approximately-MW lasers).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except, lots of devs use github, and see what using Azure means. Management is seeing that downtime too. So what insane person will ever touch Azure willingly? Hotmail used to run on bsd, and they tried to move it to WinNT, back in the day. Same thing. Disaster. And it was held up as a reason to never use winnt for serious work, for years. Microsoft just always shoots themselves in the foot.
> So what insane person will ever touch Azure willingly? The nobody-got-fired-for-choosing-Microsoft crowd. And they don’t look few and far between.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that not still down though because it still relies on GH actions to orchestrate?
It most likely is. We are using Ubicloud (which seems to work the same way hf jobs does) and it's also down. GitHub is not sending out Webhooks and is also not able to queue external jobs. If we had to emergency deploy anything now I'd have no idea how to really do that...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It most likely is. We are using Ubicloud (which seems to work the same way hf jobs does) and it's also down. GitHub is not sending out Webhooks and is also not able to queue external jobs. If we had to emergency deploy anything now I'd have no idea how to really do that...
Wait, were Webhooks also down, not notifying about commit pushes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except anything I'd self host would be down much more often. I've hardly ever actually experienced down time issues with github when I needed it.
I've never understood this argument. Even if self-hosted things were offline more often (which I've never found to be the case, I've had Forgejo + runners running for a year now with no downtime), the real benefit is that you yourself can work to bring it back online when it does, rather than waiting on a large, slow-moving organization to figure out what slopped PR caused their global service serving ungodly amounts…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which wasn't a problem before MS acquisition. Git is the write intensive process. It scaled to millions of contributors. Then couldn't keep scaling. But sure if you believe the narrative and blame ai bots.
GitHub had 30 million users in 2018 when it was acquired by Microsoft. This year alone they added 30 million users for total of 180 million. So pre-Microsoft GitHub faced very different problems compared to post-Microsoft GitHub not even considering poor management or AI. They're by far the largest platform of its kind, so I'm sure the problems are uniquely difficult to solve.
Is there a single Google service that has ever had reliability this bad? Facebook? Instagram? TikTok? Apple? Those companies all run hugely scaled write-heavy platforms. Why is GitHub so uniquely unreliable?
Me and 1 billion of my best friends can upload 5GB 4K videos to iCloud Photos and live stream to Facebook all day long but GitHub who is owned by Microsoft the second largest cloud computing provider on the planet can’t handle 180 million users pushing code and running pipelines on VMs?
I don't think this portents anything great for software in general. We're a good year+ into the use LLMs for all major bits of software that we all rely upon and GitHub here is down to one 9 of uptime. I've been using GitHub for a _long_ time, my first commits there go back to August 2009!, and I honestly don't recall GitHub going down as much as it has in the last year. I'm sure there's other things happening in the…
I think it is a natural progression in technology. Failure rates were high for initial aircraft designs and safety improved over time, for instance.