[HN Gopher] Upptime - GitHub-powered open-source uptime monitor ...
___________________________________________________________________
Upptime - GitHub-powered open-source uptime monitor and status page
Author : fahrradflucht
Score : 117 points
Date : 2020-12-27 19:14 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (upptime.js.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (upptime.js.org)
| victorhooi wrote:
| One limitation of their approach seems to be that it must be
| published in a public Github repo - it can't be a private repo.
|
| This means it might not be so suitable for internal, or local
| apps - only public facing websites.
|
| I wonder how difficult it'd be to make a mode for Upptime, that
| used say, local agents, and posted the results to a local
| webserver, rather than to public Github Pages.
| dstroot wrote:
| In the not too distant past GitHub was hit by some massive DDOS
| attacks themselves.
| dinkleberg wrote:
| I like using GitHub Actions for small automation tasks like this
| as well, but I'm curious what the execution time is for each of
| these runs. GH Actions has been reliable for me, but it tends to
| be rather slow due to the architecture. Also I feel like this
| would chew up all my build mins pretty quick (this is 8000+
| runs/month).
|
| Side note, I find it hilarious how many sites use those generic
| "modern" illustrations which have absolutely nothing to do with
| the service or page context. I know it's tempting to keep up with
| the modern design trends, but picking from one of those
| illustration packs almost always leads to questionable choices.
| harrydehal wrote:
| Guilty as charged, as I've used those illustrations for a few
| personal projects as well.
|
| For anyone interested, you can generate custom variations of
| them here and see more from work from the original artists:
|
| https://blush.design/collections
| Karliss wrote:
| Abusing version control and CI service as database sounds like a
| way for ruining it for open source projects that actually need
| it. The recent Travis thing didn't happen without reason.
| lipanski wrote:
| I second this - it sounds like a massive waste to spin up a
| Github Actions job in order to trigger a basic request every 5
| minutes, 300 times a day.
|
| Why not just use a dedicated uptime service with a free tier?
| I've been using UptimeRobot [1] in the past - they give you 50
| free checks at the same refresh rate of 5 minutes.
|
| [1] https://uptimerobot.com/
| jjeaff wrote:
| You say "spin up" which in my mind implies a whole VM. I
| think surely actions are just run in sort of a container of
| some sort like a lambda.
|
| I would think it should be rather efficient to run a github
| action.
| xahrepap wrote:
| Yes and no. Depends on tenancy requirements. I know with
| docker and other common Linux container strategies you
| would want to keep each tenant on their own VM. A container
| isn't safe enough.
|
| So if this is your org's only action. Then you're probably
| spinning up a VM. If you have other options. You're
| probably not adding any overhead.
|
| (Edit: grammar)
| cube2222 wrote:
| You can also use more secure containarization
| technologies than native docker, like gVisor, to achieve
| both lightness and isolation.
| smarx007 wrote:
| They support Linux, Windows, and macOS. Surely that cannot
| be covered just with containers. On Linux, they allow
| workflows with a large number of different containers
| involved and I don't think GH would be happy to debug all
| Docker-inside-Docker problems. So, I guess there is a
| control algorithm that keeps up to N (100?) VMs spinned up
| in a free VM pool with the KPI of VM allocation from the
| pool to be under X s (5?).
|
| Edit: from https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-
| team@latest/actions/crea... "Actions can run directly on a
| machine or in a Docker container".
| nickjj wrote:
| I use Uptime Robot too. Been using them for years on the free
| plan. It's dependable.
| the_arun wrote:
| How about self hosted enterprise GitHub?
| fahrradflucht wrote:
| I'm pretty sure the reason for "the recent Travis thing" is
| called Idera, Inc.
| sneak wrote:
| I doubt Microsoft (GitHub's owner) cares that much about such
| tiny usage. They run all of Azure, after all.
|
| A small price to pay, it seems, to lock more people into
| GitHub/GitHub Actions. We're talking pennies, here.
| ende wrote:
| Yeah, MS has been pretty vague so far on gha usage. Basically
| "have fun; don't go crazy". I imagine they are waiting and
| collecting more data before opting to impose any specific
| usage constraints.
| Denvercoder9 wrote:
| _> I doubt Microsoft (GitHub 's owner) cares that much about
| such tiny usage._
|
| They probably don't care about one person doing this, but if
| tens of thousands of repositories start doing this it becomes
| a problem.
|
| _> They run all of Azure, after all._
|
| They get paid for that.
| arvindamirtaa wrote:
| They will for this too. Github actions aren't free. They
| just have a generous free tier.
| [deleted]
| littlestymaar wrote:
| Given that in recent years Github had more downtime that your
| usual app, the github-powered part may be more of a liability
| than an asset ;).
| lights0123 wrote:
| Yeah, and GitHub Actions is also usually down more often than
| their other services.
| ec109685 wrote:
| Neat. A lot of the status page solutions are very expensive. Up
| to 1500 a month: https://www.atlassian.com/software/statuspage
|
| And that doesn't include the synthetic monitoring part.
|
| That said, we use site 24x7 at work and it works well enough.
| that_guy_iain wrote:
| To be fair, 1500 a month for the companies that would be
| purchasing that level of the service isn't much. They would be
| spending more than that on resources to maintain an internal
| one via servers and people hours.
| freebuju wrote:
| Love the name. Simple and original :)
| simon1573 wrote:
| I've been using updown.io for my side-projects the last 18 months
| and I'm very happy with the service. One comment pointed out that
| status monitoring is expensive - I think I've payed a grand total
| of $5 for these 18 months, so I don't agree at all.
| interactivecode wrote:
| This is great! Sure even github might have downtime. But keeping
| track of the status for small side projects this is perfect
| maxandersen wrote:
| From GitHub usage policy:
|
| " (for example, don't use Actions as a content delivery network
| or as part of a serverless application, but a low benefit Action
| could be ok if it's also low burden); or"
|
| I think this would qualify as serverless application...
| sepbot wrote:
| In case the designer of the page sees this, your dark mode needs
| some work: https://imgur.com/JHP9C6r
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-12-27 23:00 UTC)