5 ms·

I can't be the only one that feels that GitLab has extended downtime at least weekly, sometimes bi-weekly.

by mondss 6y ago

dt5702 6y ago
Do you have info on how different providers stack up?
RicoElectrico 6y ago
Obligatory "is bi-weekly 2 or 0.5 times a week" confusion comment ;) Though from the context it's 2.
- Jenk 6y ago
  This is why we have "fortnightly" in the English language.
  - ntechau 6y ago
    ok
    - aufhebung 6y ago
      The word fortnight is in common parlance. Four score is not. But for the record the term bi-weekly is still confusing.
    - kweinber 6y ago
      Like it or not, fortnightly and “once every two weeks” are your only unambiguous choices. We actually had a programming interview question using biweekly at a previous job. It was about thorough requirements definition and understanding/agreeing to measurements.
  - herodoturtle 6y ago
    TIL: "A fortnight is a unit of time equal to 14 days (2 weeks). The word derives from the Old English term fēowertyne niht, meaning "fourteen nights". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortnight https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortnight
  - KptMarchewa 6y ago
    Or just say "twice a week" and "once every two weeks" and not leave everyone in a meeting thinking you're talking about popular video game.
0x008 6y ago
I use gitlab daily and have not experienced any outage in last 6 months probably.
- nops 6y ago
  6 months is a pretty low bar for a SCM tool.
  - roblabla 6y ago
    Github has had frequent downtime too in the last 6 months too. For a low bar, it seems to be fairly hard to clear.
- time0ut 6y ago
  It is usually their shared runners. I experience outages with them a couple times a month. It isn't a big deal since we maintain our own private pool, so I just move jobs to them. (They make you pay for CI minutes so we use them for certain jobs.)
  - wdb 6y ago
    For me even our private runners stopped worked over the last few weeks
    - time0ut 6y ago
      Ouch. We haven't seen that, but we don't run them all the time either.
- skohan 6y ago
  Same - I've had zero issues.
- danaris 6y ago
  I use GitLab for my side project (source control only; don't have any kind of CI set up just at the moment) and it's been years since there was any really noticeable slowness for me. I can't say I use it daily, but fairly frequently.
bromonkey 6y ago
*any non self-hosted git provider
stabbles 6y ago
Github seems to be doing worse
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- rvz 6y ago
  Yes. They (GitHub) have been doing a lot worse. Last time I checked, they where completely down 2 days ago. [0] Before that, GitHub Actions was down 14 days ago: [1]. At least with GitLab, you can set up a self-hosted solution for free as a backup, unlike GitHub (Unless you want to pay a lot for GH Enterprise) where some have 'gone all in on GitHub Actions' and then some couldn't push that critical change [2] before the start of the weekend. Oh dear. Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213
  - tomxor 6y ago
    > Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. I've been wanting to do this for some time purely for git hosting (don't care about CI at all) but wasn't sure about how to make it failover... Personally i'd be happy with a headless git server, but that's not fair on everyone else who wants the GUI to browse and organise stuff, so I want gitlab etc to deal with that. What would be nice is to have a headless backup server that allowed everyone to continue pulling/pushing from the CLI with their existing repos when gitlab is down. I can't see a smooth way of doing that since it would require messing with the git remotes, unless the solution is inverted and uses a single remote pointing at the "backup" server which then replicates to gitlab, but I don't think gitlab can be configured to change the default remote when people clone it from the UI. I suppose this is why people just end up self hosting gitlab instead.
    - the_duke 6y ago
Jamie9912 6y ago
Our self-hosted GitLab instance is running fine!
- mikepurvis 6y ago
  Yup; I just updated ours to 13.9.4 and it was seamless as always (EE version).
- drcursor 6y ago
  Pitty its licensing cost will go up ten fold next year.
  - loloquwowndueo 6y ago
    How so? Pics or it didn’t happen.
    - smcleod 6y ago
      https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-subscription-model/ https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...
    - drcursor 6y ago
      https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-subscription-model/ https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...
  - sofixa 6y ago
    Only for the paid tiers, free tier stays free.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - drcursor 6y ago
      0 ten times fold = 0
wongarsu 6y ago
Not downtime, but some kind of issue, yes [1]. However github is not much better [2] and gives much less detail and fewer updates. Bitbucket is more solid recently [3] (but wasn't really better than the others in 2020) 1: https://status.gitlab.com/pages/history/5b36dc6502d06804c08349f7 https://status.gitlab.com/pages/history/5b36dc6502d06804c083... 2: https://www.githubstatus.com/history https://www.githubstatus.com/history (don't get fooled by them collapsing the incident list after three per month) 2: https://bitbucket.status.atlassian.com/history https://bitbucket.status.atlassian.com/history (also collapses after three per month)

I can't be the only one that feels that GitLab has extended downtime at least weekly, sometimes bi-weekly.

by mondss 6y ago

I can't be the only one that feels that GitLab has extended downtime at least weekly, sometimes bi-weekly.

dt5702 6y ago

Do you have info on how different providers stack up?

RicoElectrico 6y ago

Obligatory "is bi-weekly 2 or 0.5 times a week" confusion comment ;) Though from the context it's 2.

Jenk 6y ago
This is why we have "fortnightly" in the English language.
- ntechau 6y ago
  ok
  - aufhebung 6y ago
    The word fortnight is in common parlance. Four score is not. But for the record the term bi-weekly is still confusing.
  - kweinber 6y ago
    Like it or not, fortnightly and “once every two weeks” are your only unambiguous choices. We actually had a programming interview question using biweekly at a previous job. It was about thorough requirements definition and understanding/agreeing to measurements.
- herodoturtle 6y ago
  TIL: "A fortnight is a unit of time equal to 14 days (2 weeks). The word derives from the Old English term fēowertyne niht, meaning "fourteen nights". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortnight https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortnight
- KptMarchewa 6y ago
  Or just say "twice a week" and "once every two weeks" and not leave everyone in a meeting thinking you're talking about popular video game.

0x008 6y ago

I use gitlab daily and have not experienced any outage in last 6 months probably.

nops 6y ago
6 months is a pretty low bar for a SCM tool.
- roblabla 6y ago
  Github has had frequent downtime too in the last 6 months too. For a low bar, it seems to be fairly hard to clear.
time0ut 6y ago
It is usually their shared runners. I experience outages with them a couple times a month. It isn't a big deal since we maintain our own private pool, so I just move jobs to them. (They make you pay for CI minutes so we use them for certain jobs.)
- wdb 6y ago
  For me even our private runners stopped worked over the last few weeks
  - time0ut 6y ago
    Ouch. We haven't seen that, but we don't run them all the time either.
skohan 6y ago
Same - I've had zero issues.
danaris 6y ago
I use GitLab for my side project (source control only; don't have any kind of CI set up just at the moment) and it's been years since there was any really noticeable slowness for me. I can't say I use it daily, but fairly frequently.

bromonkey 6y ago

*any non self-hosted git provider

stabbles 6y ago

Github seems to be doing worse

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
rvz 6y ago
Yes. They (GitHub) have been doing a lot worse. Last time I checked, they where completely down 2 days ago. [0] Before that, GitHub Actions was down 14 days ago: [1]. At least with GitLab, you can set up a self-hosted solution for free as a backup, unlike GitHub (Unless you want to pay a lot for GH Enterprise) where some have 'gone all in on GitHub Actions' and then some couldn't push that critical change [2] before the start of the weekend. Oh dear. Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439075 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301659 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26439213
- tomxor 6y ago
  > Maybe its time to setup a self-hosted backup VCS and not depend entirely on GitHub/GitLab web. I've been wanting to do this for some time purely for git hosting (don't care about CI at all) but wasn't sure about how to make it failover... Personally i'd be happy with a headless git server, but that's not fair on everyone else who wants the GUI to browse and organise stuff, so I want gitlab etc to deal with that. What would be nice is to have a headless backup server that allowed everyone to continue pulling/pushing from the CLI with their existing repos when gitlab is down. I can't see a smooth way of doing that since it would require messing with the git remotes, unless the solution is inverted and uses a single remote pointing at the "backup" server which then replicates to gitlab, but I don't think gitlab can be configured to change the default remote when people clone it from the UI. I suppose this is why people just end up self hosting gitlab instead.
  - the_duke 6y ago

Jamie9912 6y ago

Our self-hosted GitLab instance is running fine!

mikepurvis 6y ago
Yup; I just updated ours to 13.9.4 and it was seamless as always (EE version).
drcursor 6y ago
Pitty its licensing cost will go up ten fold next year.
- loloquwowndueo 6y ago
  How so? Pics or it didn’t happen.
  - smcleod 6y ago
    https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-subscription-model/ https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...
  - drcursor 6y ago
    https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-subscription-model/ https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...
- sofixa 6y ago
  Only for the paid tiers, free tier stays free.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - drcursor 6y ago
    0 ten times fold = 0

wongarsu 6y ago

Not downtime, but some kind of issue, yes [1]. However github is not much better [2] and gives much less detail and fewer updates. Bitbucket is more solid recently [3] (but wasn't really better than the others in 2020) 1: https://status.gitlab.com/pages/history/5b36dc6502d06804c08349f7 https://status.gitlab.com/pages/history/5b36dc6502d06804c083... 2: https://www.githubstatus.com/history https://www.githubstatus.com/history (don't get fooled by them collapsing the incident list after three per month) 2: https://bitbucket.status.atlassian.com/history https://bitbucket.status.atlassian.com/history (also collapses after three per month)