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

Incident with Github.com [resolved]

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 1001 posts

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#931

Post by m4rtink »

rfgplk wrote: post #826
mooreds wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found this reddit thread from a month ago that talks about the scale: Commit volume went from 1 billion total in all of 2025 to 275 million per week by early 2026. https://www.reddit.com/r/softwaredevelopment/comments/1uv5s7...

Tracks with some of my internal metrics. There are certain projects I'm tracking (solo dev or a small team of a few people) doing 500k LoC changes _per week_. There's one project that caught my attention in particular because they had something like 800k commits and around 7 million lines of code... and they created the repo in _July_. Also, yes I checked, the repo gradually grew over time they didn't just splat it i…

Nad is that actually useful for something in the end ? Or just useless rewrites and insane code duplication/bundling/vendoring ?

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#932

Post by m4rtink »

ALLTaken wrote: post #760
stingraycharles wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m willing to give them a break as I’m assuming they have a lot of scaling problems due to the influx of LLM assisted coding. But maybe I’m wrong?

No, that's almost exactly right, except that scaling problem is inverse! MSFT is giving away most of their Azure Datacenters resources to AI, to make money and doesn't care if Github suffers along the way and drains Github's available resources to bare minimum. Leading to outages like this, but you're 100% spot on right too. All those Claude/OpenClaw instances produce so much Code, people setup more and more reposito…

Are they really making money from AI or just dumping resources on hoping they will be making money from it ?

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#933

Post by devin »

Fuzzwah wrote: post #893
figassis wrote: post #881

I think this is the curse of scale, but also of pseudo-leaders who think leadership is "pushing engineering to rapid-fire features for number go up." You tell engineers and engineering leaders to "just add this one feature, it's really important, what's the ETA? No, that's too late, the market will have moved on, this is existential, you're a bottleneck," fire, hire, fire, hire. Meanwhile the CEO feels great, because…

And then consider that GitHub hasn't had their own CEO for a year now.

In name, sure. Does it matter who you call the person directing the chaos?

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#935

Post by atomicnumber3 »

philipov wrote: post #899
figassis wrote: post #881

I think this is the curse of scale, but also of pseudo-leaders who think leadership is "pushing engineering to rapid-fire features for number go up." You tell engineers and engineering leaders to "just add this one feature, it's really important, what's the ETA? No, that's too late, the market will have moved on, this is existential, you're a bottleneck," fire, hire, fire, hire. Meanwhile the CEO feels great, because…

Which company is capitalizing on GitHub's lack of leadership?

Literally every single company is currently building both an AI router and a git repo hosting solution.

Also OSS like forgejo is taking off too.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#936

Post by penteract »

hinkley wrote: post #718
dannyw wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The network effects isn’t that much, and like what we see with Steam, you want to be where the audience is. More realistically, MAU or something is a metric/OKR. It’s easy to imagine why a business wouldn’t want to cap that.

Someone did a study that suggested the network effect is logarithmic in nature, but if that’s true it means something with 95% market share is 3 times “better” for having everyone there. Not 20 or two orders of magnitude better but not nothing.

Please could you link to the study if you can find it. The definition of "better" seems quite critical here, as well as whether it's specific to code hosting websites. A messaging platform is pretty useless if I'm the only user, but Github would still be useful to me without anyone else having an account.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#937

Post by chillfox »

jm4 wrote: post #904
chillfox wrote: post #897

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can absolutely build a solution that works for that range, you just have to pick your tech stack for efficiency and not rapid development. CI will be the tricky one, but I am pretty sure it can work if you keep the limits low, or price it based on usage.

Why not do it then? Seems you would have plenty of customers judging by this thread and the others today asking about alternatives.

Because I don't have the money to start it.

I can't do it in my spare time, because then the company I work for will own it. And I can't just not be employed, because I have bills to pay.

I would love to run a small software company making products individuals can afford.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#938

Post by paustint »

iamcoder18 wrote: post #920
figassis wrote: post #881

I think this is the curse of scale, but also of pseudo-leaders who think leadership is "pushing engineering to rapid-fire features for number go up." You tell engineers and engineering leaders to "just add this one feature, it's really important, what's the ETA? No, that's too late, the market will have moved on, this is existential, you're a bottleneck," fire, hire, fire, hire. Meanwhile the CEO feels great, because…

Code.storage is able to handle large scales too: https://code.storage/ +-------------------------+-------------------------------+ | Total storage limit | Unlimited | | Git request rate limits | Unlimited (Seen: 500+/s/repo) | | API rate limits | Unlimited (Seen: 15k+/s) | | Max repos | Unlimited | | Concurrent writes | 30+ | | Repository size limit | 32TB | | Git LFS | Supported | | GitHub/3rd party sync | Supported…

WAT is the landing page all about, my brain can't process it. I had to close the tab after 10 seconds as I got immediate anxiety.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#939

Post by birkey »

figassis wrote: post #881

I think this is the curse of scale, but also of pseudo-leaders who think leadership is "pushing engineering to rapid-fire features for number go up." You tell engineers and engineering leaders to "just add this one feature, it's really important, what's the ETA? No, that's too late, the market will have moved on, this is existential, you're a bottleneck," fire, hire, fire, hire. Meanwhile the CEO feels great, because…

Change is inevitable. Users will demand features and then you need to keep supporting them. I think GitHub's recent issues ishttps://www.birkey.co/2026-08-17-githubs-recent-crisis-has-a... more of a symptom of current AI slop than thier eng culture or structure. I put some of my thoughts here:

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#940

Post by encomiast »

devin wrote: post #933
Fuzzwah wrote: post #893

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then consider that GitHub hasn't had their own CEO for a year now.

In name, sure. Does it matter who you call the person directing the chaos?

I can't speak for Github's situation specifically, but I work in an org that is often cursed by "acting" leadership. People in these acting roles don't have a real mandate to do much other than follow orders, try not break anything, and keep the seat warm. They basic tread water, which in many environments is better described as drowning more slowly.
Post reply on HN