3 ms·
Last time I tried switching to it it was slow as molasses on the command line. Easily several times slower than GitHub. So I went back to GitHub. I still have a
by m0zg 8y ago
Last time I tried switching to it it was slow as molasses on the command line. Easily several times slower than GitHub. So I went back to GitHub. I still have a GitLab account, but I only keep my dotfiles there.
I keep hearing they've improved performance, and maybe they did, but that's also what I heard last time I tried it, so now I'm kind of reluctant to give it another try. Unlike before, now it doesn't just have to be "as fast", for me to switch to it, it has to be noticeably faster. Feature-wise it's easily on par already, but performance is also an important feature, and I don't think codebase being primarily in Ruby inspires a lot of confidence, especially if scale is growing. You're basically running it at 1/10-1/30th the speed it could run if a proper language were used.
- lttlrck 8y agoself-hosted on a $40 digital ocean droplet performance is practically speaking indistinguishable from Github. No idea what gitlab.com is like, we picked gitlab because we could self-host.
- m0zg 8y agoHow is it maintenance-wise, BTW? How involved are the upgrades? I'm tempted to self-host, but don't want to go too far down the rabbit hole.
- toupeira 8y agoThe Omnibus package is very painless and internally uses Chef to apply configuration changes and data migrations. I maintained a (small) instance for a few years and never ran into any issues, all you need to do is upgrade the package through APT/yum etc. There's also support for zero-downtime upgrades [1] but I haven't tried it yet. [1] https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/update/#upgrading-without-downtime https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/update/#upgrading-without-downtim...