3 ms·
If I understand correctly, the public Gitlab is similar to what you can get with a private Gitlab instance. That makes me wonder, instead of trying to scale th
by CaliforniaKarl 10y ago
If I understand correctly, the public Gitlab is similar to what you can get with a private Gitlab instance. That makes me wonder, instead of trying to scale the one platform up, would it be OK to spin up a second public silo? I mean yeah, it would be a different silo, but for something free I'd say "meh".
I think it's totally fine admitting when you've stopped being able to scale up, and need to start scaling out.
- DanielDent 10y agoThey could, and as a stopgap measure that might work, but.. (1) Some of the collaboration features (e.g. work on Gitlab itself) depend on having everyone on the same instance. (2) Gitlab.com gives them a nice dogfood-esque environment for what it's like to actually operate Gitlab at scale. If they are having problems scaling it, then potentially so are their customers. Fixing the root cause is usually a good thing and is often an imperative to avoid being drowned in technical debt. (3) It moves the problem in some respects. Modern devops techniques mostly allow the number of like servers to be largely irrelevant, but still.. the more unique instances of Gitlab, the more overhead there will be managing those instances (and figuring out which projects/people go on which instances). It's a simple approach which I'm sure would work, but it also means a bunch of new problems are introduced which don't currently exist.
- rovr138 10y agoThere is a free version and paid version. The one they offer for free is the paid version. You can run your own, but you won't have every feature unless you pay.