Top
Best
New

Posted by Simpliplant 5 hours ago

GitHub Is Having Issues(www.githubstatus.com)
181 points | 117 commentspage 2
nor0x 3 hours ago|
> This incident has been resolved. Thank you for your patience and understanding as we addressed this issue. A detailed root cause analysis will be shared as soon as it is available.

does anyone know where these "detailed root cause analysis" reports are shared? is there maybe an archive?

abraham 2 hours ago|
They get posted to the incident log (https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/n07yy1bk6kc4) for example https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/lcw3tg2f6zsd.

There are also monthly availability reports: https://github.blog/tag/github-availability-report/

dkhenry 3 hours ago||
I really wish Graphite had just gone down the path of better Git hosting and reviewing, instead of trying to charge me $40 a month for an AI reviewer. It would be nice to have a real first class alternative to Github
DauntingPear7 2 hours ago|
Codeberg?
ddtaylor 2 hours ago||
Maybe we should turn these weekly posts into an actionable item we can use to move organizations away from this critical infrastructure that is failing in realtime.
overshard 4 hours ago||
I've taken to hosting everything critical like this myself on a single system with Docker Compose with regular off premises backups and a restore process that I know works because I test it every 6 months. I can swap from local hosting to a VPS in 30 mins if I need to. It seems like the majority of large services like GitHub have had increasingly annoying downtime while I try to get work done. If you know what you're doing it's a false premise that you'll just have more issues with self hosting. If you don't know what you are doing it's becoming an increasingly good time to learn. I've had 4 years of continuous uptime on my services at this point. I still push to third parties like GitHub as yet another backup and see the occasional 500 and my workflow keeps chugging along. I've gotten old and grumpy and rather just do it myself.
joshrw 4 hours ago||
Happening very often lately
risyachka 4 hours ago|
and we all know why
rezonant 4 hours ago||
Because they're moving it to Azure and doing it far too quickly, not taking care to avoid availability issues
bubblewand 57 minutes ago|||
There may be other problems but as someone who's somehow ended up integrating Git into a service twice in my career without even trying that hard to find a reason (it turns out it's weirdly handy in quite a few situations, god I wish it were implemented as a library and not a pile of Perl and shit, and yes I know about libgit2) and has looked into some of Git's and Gitlab's posts about their architectures over the years though the lens of having fought a few of the same beasts, an Azure migration was very obviously going to make things worse.
lelanthran 1 hour ago||||
Could be.

Or could be that the recent 12 months of 100x increase in code and activity is more than they had planned for when they last did capacity planning.

Vibe-coders, many of them here, often boast about the insane amount of KLoC/hour they can generate and merge.

Zanfa 4 hours ago||||
It wasn't the migration to Azure that completely borked their PR UI.
risyachka 3 hours ago|||
yeah, ai slop rush

everyone builds off vibes and moves fast! like no, if you are a mature company you don't need to move fast, in fact you need to move slow

the only thing that can kill e.g. github is if they move fast and break things like they do recently

garciasn 4 hours ago||
How reliable is githubstatus.com? I know that status pages are generally not updated until Leadership and/or PR has a chance to approve the changes; is that the case here?

Our health check checks against githubstatus.com to verify 'why' there may be a GHA failure and reports it, e.g.

Cannot run: repo clone failed — GitHub is reporting issues (Partial System Outage: 'Incident with Copilot and Actions'). No cached manifests available.

But, if it's not updated, we get more generic responses. Are there better ways that you all employ (other than to not use GHA, you silly haters :-))

duckkg5 4 hours ago|
Right now the page says Copilot and Actions are affected but I can't even push anything to a repo from the CLI.
alemanek 4 hours ago|||
Yep getting 500 errors intermittently on fetch and checkout operations in my CI pretty consistently at the moment. Like 1 in 2 attempts
jjice 4 hours ago|||
Agreed. I believe that's marked under "Git Operations" and it's all green. Just began being able to push again a minute ago.
paddy_m 2 hours ago||
I am getting really tired of github. outages happen that's a given. but on so much stuff they don't even care or try. Github is becoming the bottleneck in my agentic coding workflows. unless I make Claude do it intelligently, I hit rate limits checking on CI jobs (5000 api requests in an hour). Depot makes their CI so much better, but it is still tied to github in a couple of annoying places.

PRs are a defacto communication and coordination bus between different code review tools, its all a mess.

LLMs make it worse because I'm pushing more code to github than ever before, and it just isn't setup to deal with this type of workload when it is working well.

lelanthran 1 hour ago|
> I am getting really tired of github. outages happen that's a given. but on so much stuff they don't even care or try. Github is becoming the bottleneck in my agentic coding workflows. unless I make Claude do it intelligently, I hit rate limits checking on CI jobs (5000 api requests in an hour). Depot makes their CI so much better, but it is still tied to github in a couple of annoying places.

Have you ever considered that this is the problem? GH never planned for this sort of pointless and unpaid activity before. Now they have a large increase (I've seen figures of 100x) in activity and they can't keep up.

It doesn't help that almost none of the added activity is actually useful; it's just thousands and thousands of clones of some other pointless product.

delduca 2 hours ago||
Microslop is farting too hard on vibecoding
littlestymaar 4 hours ago||
In many companies I worked for, there were a bunch of infrastructure astronauts who made everything very complicated in the name of zero downtime and sold them to management as “downtime would kill pur credibility and our businesses ”, and then you have billion dollar companies everyone relies on (GitHub, Cloudflare) who have repeated downtime yet it doesn't seem to affect their business in any way.
wiether 3 hours ago||
It's a multitude of factors but basically they can act like that because they are dominant on the market.

The classic "nobody ever gets fired for buying IBM".

If you pick something else, and there's issue, people will complain about your choice being wrong, should have gone with the biggest player.

Even if you provide metrics showing your solution's downtime being 1% of the big player.

Something like Cloudflare is so big and ubiquitous, that, when there's a downtime, even your grandma is aware of it because they talk about it in the news. So nobody will put the blame on the person choosing Cloudflare.

Even if people decides to go back (I had a few customers asking us to migrate to other solutions or to build some kind of failover after the last Cloudflare incidents), it costs so much to find the solutions that can replace it with the same service level and to do the migration, that, in the end, they prefer to eat the cost of the downtimes.

Meanwhile, if you're a regular player in a very competitive market, yes, every downtime will result in lost income, customers leaving... which can hurt quite a lot when you don't have hundreds of thousands of customers.

bonesss 4 hours ago|||
Businesses are incommensurate.

GitHub is a distributed version control storage hub with additional add-on features. If peeps can’t work around a git server/hub being down and don’t know to have independent reproducible builds or integrations and aren’t using project software wildly better that GitHubs’, there are issues. And for how much money? A few hundred per dev per year? Forget total revenue, the billions, the entire thing is a pile of ‘suck it up, buttercup’ with ToS to match.

In contrast, I’ve been working for a private company selling patient-touching healthcare solutions and we all would have committed seppuku with outages like this. Yeah, zero downtime or as close to it as possible even if it means fixing MS bugs before they do. Fines, deaths, and public embarrassment were potential results of downtime.

All investments become smart or dumb depending on context. If management agrees that downtime would be lethal my prejudice would be to believe them since they know the contracts and sales perspective. If ‘they crashed that one time’ stops all sales, the 0% revenue makes being 30% faster than those astronauts irrelevant.

Krutonium 4 hours ago|||
To be fair - it SUPER does. Being down frequently makes your competition look better.

Of course, once you have the momentum it doesn't matter nearly as much, at least for a while. If it happens too much though, people will start looking for alternatives.

The key to remember is Momentum is hard to redirect, but with enough force (reasons), it will.

baggy_trough 4 hours ago||
The reality is that consumers don't really care about downtime unless it's truly frequent.
littlestymaar 4 hours ago||
Exactly.

And the frequency they can tolerate is surprisingly high given that we're talking about the 20th or so outage of 2026 for github. (See: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=githubstatus.com)

granzymes 4 hours ago|
I have a bug bash in an hour and fixes that need to go in beforehand. So of course GitHub is down.
More comments...