GitHub Major Service Outage • Hacker News Board

Re: GitHub Major Service Outage

#81

Post by i336_ » Wed, May 31, 2017, 11:34 PM UTC

yeukhon wrote: post #59

i336_ wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, interesting. This info is definitely filed away, thanks. I don't quite remember but I think I might've been commenting on something on GitHub when I saw the time glitch. Initially for a moment I thought "why not just have OCD local NTP tracking?" but then I realized that time glitching around (even at the millisecond level) can be disastrous. One way to solve this is to obsess about keeping up to date with NTP,…

If you look at "man git-commit-tree" While parent object ids are provided on the command line, author and committer information is taken from the following environment variables, if set: GIT_AUTHOR_NAME GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL GIT_AUTHOR_DATE GIT_COMMITTER_NAME GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL GIT_COMMITTER_DATE (nb " " and "\n"s are stripped) In case (some of) these environment variables are not set, the information is taken from the c…

Very interesting. Thanks for the demo and references!

Re: GitHub Major Service Outage

#82

Post by tedchs » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 12:43 AM UTC

saosebastiao wrote: post #70

Business idea: github hosting failover. You'd probably need a modified git client, but if you can't push/pull/whatever from github, it transparently fails over to your service which will sync up with github once they've recovered. Even better idea: github should stop failing.

A couple times I have configured multiple "remotes" for my local git repo and pushed to both, e.g. GitHub + Google Cloud Source Repository, or even just a bare repo on a VPS.

Re: GitHub Major Service Outage

#83

Post by peterwwillis » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 4:46 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #79

peterwwillis wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

201 is "request has been fulfilled, resource has been created". It is explicitly not "we will get to it when we can". You are thinking of 202, "request has been accepted for processing", for asynchronous request processing.

I assure you, 201 is used all the time to say something has been done when it's only been queued, regardless of what the RFC says. This is based on real world integration experience. Http response status codes rarely align with RFC guidelines.

A lot of people back up to tape and never test the tapes, too. Doesn't mean bad practice should be expected.

Re: GitHub Major Service Outage

#84

Post by toomuchtodo » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 1:54 PM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #83

toomuchtodo wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assure you, 201 is used all the time to say something has been done when it's only been queued, regardless of what the RFC says. This is based on real world integration experience. Http response status codes rarely align with RFC guidelines.

A lot of people back up to tape and never test the tapes, too. Doesn't mean bad practice should be expected.

Disagree. Plan defensively.

Re: GitHub Major Service Outage

#85

Post by tchaffee » Thu, Jun 01, 2017, 9:12 PM UTC

scott_karana wrote: post #77

tchaffee wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem with a credit is that it never even comes close to what I'm losing in income. An ISP is an excellent example. I might get a $10 credit for 24 hours of downtime. I'm charging slightly more per hour than that... /s Maybe switch to bitbucket or other competition for a while?

If the price of the service working (or not working) is disproportionately large compared to the price of your lost business, that's a problem at your end: you needed to calculate the risk vs return for redundancy . Eg, if your Internet costs $100/mo, but you'd lose $100/hour when it's down during business hours, buy a fallback connection from a competing ISP. ;)

> a competing ISP

Wow! That actually exists in some places? ;-)

Infrastructure so often becomes a monopoly. I can't pay a competing bridge service to drive to work quicker, I can't pay a competing gas company to deliver gas via different pipelines to my house. And I can't pay a competing electric company that uses different wires.

I actually am lucky enough to live in a city where there are many competing high speed ISPs. But guess what? I've paid for fallback connections in the past and when one goes down, the other goes down, so I go out to lunch and see the guys working on the wires in the cabinet down the street. The wires that both my ISPs share. I suppose I could get a satellite ISP? That latency. True redundancy for infrastructure is actually very expensive in most cases.