5 ms·

I tried to use gitlab and was very excited with the self host option. But for a small business, it was too much hassle with setup, installation and the biggest

I tried to use gitlab and was very excited with the self host option. But for a small business, it was too much hassle with setup, installation and the biggest issue: huge memory requirement. On a DigitalOcean droplet of 512MB, it was too slow. I switched to Bitbucket private repo. May be i was not doing something right.

hobarrera 11y ago
I'm curious as to why you didn't simply go with the free hosted gitlab.com option, instead of bitbucket. Both are hosted, and I feel that gitlab has more features (ci, free, and a few small niceties).
BinaryIdiot 11y ago
I think you're comparing apples to oranges. As far as I know BitBucket doesn't offer a self hosted solution but GitLab offers both. In fact they match BitBucket on pricing too, well at least for the free tier. You can host private repos directly on GitLab and BitBucket for free. The self hosted option may not be right for you especially if you're already using BitBucket private repos. Why did you not try GitLab's hosted private repos?
- sytse 11y ago
  Thanks! Indeed on GitLab.com https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ you can have as many private repo's as you want for free.
gtaylor 11y ago
> May be i was not doing something right. Here you go: > On a DigitalOcean droplet of 512MB I'm not sure it's realistic to expect great performance on a tiny droplet in a budget provider that over-provisions the heck out of these tiny instance sizes. Spend more than $5/month and you may get better results.
- hobarrera 11y ago
  It's actually not so obvious. I run an droplet with email, xmpp, web, several django apps (+postgres), and a few other small things, and don't even come close to pushing the limit on the cheapest DO droplet. GitLab has actually a pretty large overhead, and for a single user, it requires quite a bit of CPU/RAM. I assume that the requirement is not lineal though.
- maratd 11y ago
  I have a dozen web apps installed on my personal 512MB droplet and they all work flawlessly.
  - gtaylor 11y ago
    Are your dozen web apps large, featureful code forge systems?
    - maratd 11y ago
      No, they're not. That said, there is no valid engineering reason why any web app should require more than 512MB of memory to run with minimal user load. User load is what bumps up the RAM requirements. If the active user count is in the single digits and you're running into problems with RAM, either something is deeply misconfigured on your server, you have a ton of data, or the codebase is poor.
      - chrisseaton 11y ago
        What if your web app manages a data structure that is simply larger than 512 MB? Like analytics data or something like that.
        maratd 11y ago
        Please read what I wrote again. I specifically mentioned a large data set.
        deleted 11y ago
sytse 11y ago
I'm sorry but 512MB is too little for GitLab, as said on https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/install/requirements.md#memory https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/inst... "we strongly advise against this amount of memory"

hobarrera 11y ago

I'm curious as to why you didn't simply go with the free hosted gitlab.com option, instead of bitbucket. Both are hosted, and I feel that gitlab has more features (ci, free, and a few small niceties).

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

I think you're comparing apples to oranges. As far as I know BitBucket doesn't offer a self hosted solution but GitLab offers both. In fact they match BitBucket on pricing too, well at least for the free tier. You can host private repos directly on GitLab and BitBucket for free. The self hosted option may not be right for you especially if you're already using BitBucket private repos. Why did you not try GitLab's hosted private repos?

sytse 11y ago
Thanks! Indeed on GitLab.com https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ you can have as many private repo's as you want for free.

gtaylor 11y ago

> May be i was not doing something right. Here you go: > On a DigitalOcean droplet of 512MB I'm not sure it's realistic to expect great performance on a tiny droplet in a budget provider that over-provisions the heck out of these tiny instance sizes. Spend more than $5/month and you may get better results.

hobarrera 11y ago
It's actually not so obvious. I run an droplet with email, xmpp, web, several django apps (+postgres), and a few other small things, and don't even come close to pushing the limit on the cheapest DO droplet. GitLab has actually a pretty large overhead, and for a single user, it requires quite a bit of CPU/RAM. I assume that the requirement is not lineal though.
maratd 11y ago
I have a dozen web apps installed on my personal 512MB droplet and they all work flawlessly.
- gtaylor 11y ago
  Are your dozen web apps large, featureful code forge systems?
  - maratd 11y ago
    No, they're not. That said, there is no valid engineering reason why any web app should require more than 512MB of memory to run with minimal user load. User load is what bumps up the RAM requirements. If the active user count is in the single digits and you're running into problems with RAM, either something is deeply misconfigured on your server, you have a ton of data, or the codebase is poor.
    - chrisseaton 11y ago
      What if your web app manages a data structure that is simply larger than 512 MB? Like analytics data or something like that.
      - maratd 11y ago
        Please read what I wrote again. I specifically mentioned a large data set.
      - deleted 11y ago

sytse 11y ago

I'm sorry but 512MB is too little for GitLab, as said on https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/install/requirements.md#memory https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/inst... "we strongly advise against this amount of memory"