[HN Gopher] GitHub experiencing issues with actions, pull reques... ___________________________________________________________________ GitHub experiencing issues with actions, pull requests, packages Author : Amorymeltzer Score : 177 points Date : 2021-02-08 16:10 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.githubstatus.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.githubstatus.com) | alfiedotwtf wrote: | Curious: are Microsoft slowly replacing the innards of GitHub | with a Microsoft stack? | qbasic_forever wrote: | The main web backend is still ruby it seems: | https://github.blog/2020-08-25-upgrading-github-to-ruby-2-7/ I | can't remember where it was exactly but I remember recently | stumbling on a random github-related OSS project that had | chatter in the issues from githubbers talking about .NET and | C#. It would not surprise me to see significant pressure from | the now 2-year post-acquisition engineering org to get in line | with the rest of MS's online services that are all .NET stack. | FunnyLookinHat wrote: | This same pattern happened last week - Webhooks reporting issues, | then Pull Requests, etc. This one seems to be affecting the rest | of their systems a bit more (or maybe they're just being a bit | more detailed in exactly what is down this time). | | https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/5zb8gfbl7qkt | pestkranker wrote: | ~10 downtime per month. What is happening at GitHub? | hulitu wrote: | > ~10 downtime per month. What is happening at GitHub? | | They belong to Microsoft. Reliability was never a feature of | Microsoft products. | Droobfest wrote: | Maybe they're porting over the Azure DevOps code which also has | 'degraded performance' issues about every other day. | tylfin wrote: | The last time this happened, it was after they shipped the | phone app. | | I wonder if they have a big feature underway or are just | migrating more infrastructure to Azure? | | EDIT: Either way, some postmortems would be appreciated before | more customers have to look for a backup solution... | capableweb wrote: | If you're working on a serious project, hosting it mainly on | GitHub via Git and don't already have a backup solution in | place, I'm afraid you're late. But better late than never! | Make sure you can always deploy when less reliable services | are down, and GitHub has always been one of those. Git makes | it incredibly easy as well, as long as you have your CI/CD | externalized already. | tylfin wrote: | Yeah, this is very good advice. | | I think if revenue or product quality is tied to a VCS, | having an active-active or active-passive setup is the way | to go. | | Fortunately, I'm on an on-prem product so that investment | hasn't seemed worth it yet. | | This doesn't mean we don't escrow our code, but rather than | try to rebuild from source, I just take a short coffee | break and wait for the impacted service to come back up :) | dessant wrote: | I'm still awaiting the promised post-mortem [1] of a | retracted blog post [2][3] which has annnounced the | deprecation of the GitHub Developer Program. | | > There must be quite a story behind this - will you be | putting up a post-mortem ? (Post mortems of business | "outages" are usually more instructional) | | > Yes. We will. Please stay tuned. | | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21718171 | | [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21718083 | | [3] https://web.archive.org/web/20191205225751/https://develo | per... | Florin_Andrei wrote: | > _What is happening at GitHub?_ | | They were acquired by Microsoft a while ago, and now the | chicken are coming home to roost. | | It's pretty much on par with my Azure experience. | robbyt wrote: | Me too. The only people who think Azure is viable, haven't | actually used it. | seniorThrowaway wrote: | I recently left a project using AWS for one using Azure. I | thought the AWS API's were inconsistent and janky but they | look great compared to Azure. Azure is also extremely slow | to perform actions in my experience and the documentation | is very heavily tilted towards being sales funnels. I do | like the keyvault service and the idea of resource groups. | The whole tenant / subscription / roles / user mess of | permissions not so much, but I expected that from | Microsoft. | bredren wrote: | This is a big problem with GitHub Actions. | | It took a community drumbeat and persistence from an enterprise | customer to get the status message to even show a problem last | month. [1] | | It does suck and I do think there must be some political | infighting going on that the service is having so many | disruptions. | | There's no excuse for something this important to not only have | so much unplanned downtime, but no resources to connect with | the community by offering post mortems or other reasonable | interactions. | | That said, I'm still all in on GA. It's amazing and the | coupling with repos is great. It continues to be subtly | refined. So I just hope whoever is holding this product back | gets out of the way. | | [1] https://github.community/t/random-unknown-blob-error-when- | pu... | TruthWillHurt wrote: | Microsoft. | rvz wrote: | All I know is that it doesn't seem like a wise choice to be | locked into GitHub features or even use their tools with these | frequent downtime episodes. | | If a large open-source organisation was to rely on say, GitHub | Actions for example, well you'll probably see more and more of | "GitHub down" posts and they'll be unable to push that critical | patch or run that cloud CI on GitHub, and some maybe | considering solutions like this [0]. | | Every time this happens, you'll be completely locked in and | ending up contacting / complaining to the CEO of GitHub for | support via Twitter. | | No thanks and no deal I'm afraid. | | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23849565 | bob1029 wrote: | Good deal for us, actually. I used to get upset about this, | but the alternative really does suck more. | | You can either deal with the occasional non-productivity from | a SAAS offering (which for GH has never lasted more than | ~half a work day), or you can spin up all your own stack on- | prem and generate 10 additional full-time problems in the | quest to solve this one periodic issue. | | The trick is to never put yourself in a position where your | tools absolutely must work immediately or you lose a | customer. Why make a promise on delivering a piece of | software until its already in hand? Also, if github goes down | and I really wanted to get an issue comment in, I can just | open a text editor and keep a note around in my local repo | until everything is back up. I can even do some crazy things, | like share my local branches with other developers over side | channels until things get back to normal in the centralized | system. | | Wasn't this kinda the entire point of talking developers into | moving to the git model? Would be fun to rewind the clock and | use these takes as an argument for sticking with TFS, et. al. | yarcob wrote: | > I can even do some crazy things, like share my local | branches with other developers over side channels | | Haha, right, totally crazy, you could use git just like it | was designed to be used! Who would do that!! | | (Joking aside, despite Githubs frequent outages, I don't | recall the git service itself ever being affected) | bob1029 wrote: | > I don't recall the git service itself ever being | affected | | The most important part of their service has never failed | to work for me over the last 6 years. | swagonomixxx wrote: | I agree with you. To me it just sounds like people being | entitled, expecting a service to never go down, ever. Shit | happens and things go down. Design your processes around | that fact and have procedures lined up for when it does | happen. | | However, saying "just get GitLab and deploy it to your own | server" glosses over the huge time sink it is, especially | for small companies that are already short-staffed, to | maintain something like that. I sure as heck do not want to | be responsible for keeping my GitLab server up. | | As you say, if you're writing an issue, put it in an editor | issues.md file or something. If you're working on code, | even better, just commit locally. | leesalminen wrote: | Hosting Gitlab hasn't been a huge time sink for me and | I'm a one-person show who is conscious about my time. I | set up automatic updates and haven't SSH'd into that | machine in about a year. | bob1029 wrote: | I agree that in many scenarios you will find that your | approach is perfectly valid. | | For us, we have ~8 people that need to use the system all | at the same time. We utilize issues very heavily (we are | entering 5 figures), with lots of data-heavy QA content | throughout (screenshots/videos/binaries/etc). | Additionally, our customer environments are actually | configured to talk directly to our GitHub repository for | purposes of rebuilding themselves from source at update | time. | | Because of the number of participants who are involved | with our particular usage of GitHub, we find that a | hosted solution with horizontal scalability and | resilience to be an excellent fit. We have made the | decision to make it Microsoft's problem to figure out how | to eventually deal with 10k+ issues and 200+ | employees/clients trying to hit the same host all at the | same time. | | If we had decided to host our own GitHub/Lab server in | our cloud environment, we would be having to constantly | review the capacity of the IT systems. As we add | employees and customers, the load we put on our source | control solution will increase linearly. Additionally, | because of the deploy-time approach, having a solution | that is backed by someone else's network means that we | don't have to worry about our private network being | slammed by outside requests. Our total checkout is | nearing a gigabyte, so you can see how this might scale | poorly if we operated out of our own infrastructure. | | I almost feel like we are abusive of Microsoft's | generosity considering the sheer amount of content we | have throughout our organization's account. Every day I | wonder when I am going to get some email demanding that | we switch to a more expensive enterprise plan because of | how we use the service. Maybe that day will never come. | Even if it does, I will gladly shell out for the bigger | contract. | GordonS wrote: | I noticed that code search seems to be broken too - hasn't been | working for 1-2 hours. | | Search still works for issues, repos etc, but not code. | inetknght wrote: | Github's code search has never been useful though | mistersys wrote: | GitHub search is not very smart, but I prefer that when | searching code. When searching code, I'm usually trying to | find exact tokens i.e. a variable name or an error message | string vs. searching documents. | | I find it useful all the time. | zoomablemind wrote: | 'git grep' allows the search within the repo, assuming that | you have it cloned locally. | upbeat_general wrote: | I also find it useful yet it still often misses exact | matches. | | If I search for "int x = 5" and it doesn't return "int x = | 5;", there's an issue here. | inetknght wrote: | I've found that `grep` with PCRE enabled is far more useful | to find exact tokens like variable names or error message | strings. | | I've never had Github's search find what I'm looking for. | remram wrote: | That requires you to clone. It's a minor hassle if you | search over a single repo, but when searching across an | organization or the whole site, using grep is not an | option. | inetknght wrote: | > _That requires you to clone. It 's a minor hassle if | you search over a single repo, but when searching across | an organization or the whole site, using grep is not an | option._ | | Are you kidding? The finer granularity that searching | over an organization or whole site makes grep the far | better choice especially since its output can be fed as | input to more filtering steps. | remram wrote: | I can't understand your point. GitHub _can_ search over | finer granularities e.g. single repo. And did you | understand my use case at all, about grep not being an | option when searching at wider scales? | | No, I am not "kidding"... are you? | inetknght wrote: | I don't understand grep not being an option when | searching at wider scales. I have yet to find a wide- | enough scale that grep can't handle. | | And GitHub's search results are _literally_ useless. | | > _No, I am not "kidding"... are you?_ | | Nope | kawsper wrote: | Code search have been broken for us for a couple of months, | it's no longer reliable, I suspect something is wrong with | their indexer. | neovintage wrote: | I'm sorry code search isn't working. I'm more than happy to | help. If you reach out to me via my email I can see whats up. | neovintage [at] github [dot] com. | kawsper wrote: | I will reach out to my team and send you an e-mail. | j1elo wrote: | As others have noted, GitHub Search is not particularly | reliable. It might make you think you're finding all uses of | some token, but that can be misleading as not all instances are | necessarily shown: | | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43891605/search-partial-... | forlorn wrote: | Oh, weekly _Github is down_. | encom wrote: | Related: Seems like every other day "$PRODUCT is down" is #1 on | HN. Why? This can't possibly satisfy anyones intellectual | curiosity. | Florin_Andrei wrote: | I thought this was obvious, but apparently it isn't - not | 100% of things posted on this forum (or any forum, or the | vast majority of human interactions) are driven purely by | some abstract "intellectual curiosity" concept. | encom wrote: | No shit, you arrogant cretin. I referring to the HN | submission guidelines, which specifically uses the | "intellectual curiosity" wording. | cronix wrote: | Because many people here actually _use_ the affected | services? | hulitu wrote: | So the solution is easy: don't use it anymore. | encom wrote: | I understand that. That doesn't make it interesting. | brutal_chaos_ wrote: | Receiving crumbs of info as to WHY a service is down is | interesting to some. These are also great for tracking | postmortems (unless they take awhile, then it's a | separate post). | | Speculation is entertaining to many as well. Or perhaps | this sparks an idea for someone (omg, GH is down ALL THE | TIME, time to build a novel competitor!). | | And given the crap state status pages are in these days | (stop showing green when your site is down!), these are | great for knowing when a service is operating again. | | EDIT: words r hard | judge2020 wrote: | Probably something about centralization and relying on a | company for keeping your business running. But, of course | GitHub Enterprise Server deployments aren't down, so anyone | that really needs uptime can pay for the privilege (or can | pay for GH One which has a "30-minute SLA"). | [deleted] | fartcannon wrote: | What options exist for decentralized source discovery | indexes/pages? Like the Pirate Bay used to be (might still be, I | haven't looked in a while). | | Just searchable links to torrent based git repos. | | Googling suggests there was once (and still might be) a | 'GitTorrent' which is a fantastic name for the service. | qbasic_forever wrote: | Git was designed for decentralized use. It's not as slick and | polished as github, but it can get the job done and scales to | infinity (the linux kernel has thousands of contributors and | runs entirely dencentralized with git). | | For read-only access you can host a git repo on any static file | store, like S3, netlify, digital ocean, etc. Just | rsync/rclone/upload a bare repo from your machine and you're | done: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-Getting- | Git... | | For write access it's more difficult without running your own | server (which is super easy with gitea, gogs, etc. and just a | couple clicks to setup on popular hosts like digital ocean). | You could take an entirely decentralized approach and run | things like the linux kernel--all patches (aka pull requests) | get sent to an email list where they're reviewed, discussed, | and integrated by the maintainer of the read-only repo. | LinusS1 wrote: | Azure just needed a quick reboot | expliced wrote: | Commits I pushed were not showing up on my pull-request in the | UI, was wondering what was going on. This explains it. | superkuh wrote: | Play stupid games with centralized entities, win stupid | centralized prizes. I can understand using github/lab/etc if | you're forced to by work in order to earn money in order to live. | But willingly choosing them for personal projects is just stupid. | TobiasA wrote: | "Using GitHub for personal projects is stupid" is a hell of a | take. | superkuh wrote: | So was, "Facebook is a bad idea." in 2008. But the course of | a proprietary social network run by a single corporation only | has one outcome. It's just a matter of time. | brahyam wrote: | I believe this incident has been happening for more than 30 mins. | I've had problems with gradle pipelines failing without reason | for at least the last 6 hours | alex_g wrote: | On a related note, I have been unable to transfer a repo for two | weeks now. The sender is able to initiate it but no notification | ever appears on my end. If anyone knows how to get the attention | of someone at GitHub please let me know. I wish GitHub had a paid | support option that was reasonably priced for a single inquiry. | [deleted] | yarcob wrote: | Even though the status page shows all green checkmarks, we are | still experiencing issues. The web interface is showing stale | data and we can't perform merges in git. | | Looks like some of their systems got out of sync and they aren't | done resynchronising yet. | robbyt wrote: | Sounds like Azure... Solid 500s from API, but status is green. | yarcob wrote: | Update: After nothing happened, I rewrote the last commit and | force pushed to trigger an update. That seemed to do the trick. | | I have no inside knowledge, but from the outside it looks like | whatever outage they had broke the propagation of commit data | from the git repo to to their MySQL database. Maybe they use | webhooks for their internal systems as well? That would explain | why they first saw issues with webhooks, and later issues with | pull requests that might depend on them. | | It also looks like after they fixed the issue, they didn't | replay the failed notifications. That's why I saw stale data | even after they apparently fixed the issue. Then my push to the | repo seemed to trigger an update, and now it's back in sync. | | I'm curious to hear what really happened, but I doubt this | incident is important enough to anyone to warrant a detailed | blog post. | faitswulff wrote: | After seeing this happen over and over again, I wonder if | status pages should even be run by their own parent companies. | freakynit wrote: | Is anyone facing issue with github pages too? Updated content not | getting reflected? | exikyut wrote: | "The world might be ending." | | "Update: The world is slightly closer to ending." | | "Update: If more thing breaks the world will implode." | | "Update: This issue has been resolved." | | Me: _[Wonders what happened]_ | | - Every outage status tracker ever | drewcoo wrote: | But there was customer communication. It's checked off the | list, see? | gkop wrote: | A few years ago GH actually had a fairly transparent status | page that displayed error rates across components over narrow | timeslices. I guess they canned it not too long after their | $100M a16z raise. | WrtCdEvrydy wrote: | Because they are glorified marketing pages. | itsjloh wrote: | GitHub generally do monthly uptime reports that go into more | detail about any outages they experienced, see the latest one | here https://github.blog/2021-02-02-github-availability-report- | ja... | darknavi wrote: | One day you'll learn about the one Russian submariner who saved | all of our web services from destruction. | cyberlurker wrote: | Reference: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov | gknoy wrote: | I really enjoy seeing the postmortems that some teams publish | after these kinds of things. | edoceo wrote: | In other news, folks who are self-hosting GitLab are in great | shape. And once the GitHub issues are sorted we can make sure to | push to those public end-points of convenience. | | Self hosting critical services (email, chat, git, etc) is not a | terrible idea. Of course, CBA/risk factor for your team. | cortesoft wrote: | So when your self hosted instance goes down and you are working | on it, do your coworkers post message saying "in other news, | GitHub.com is in great shape"? | edoceo wrote: | No, cause chat is down too. Solvlem Probbed! ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-02-08 23:00 UTC)