3 ms·
Github lost at least one 9, if not two, since last year's "existential" migration to Azure.
by panarky 8mo ago
Github lost at least one 9, if not two, since last year's "existential" migration to Azure.
- arianvanp 8mo agoThey didn't migrate yet.
- Krutonium 8mo agoFucking REALLY?!
- panarky 8mo agoMigrations of Actions and Copilot to Azure completed in 2024. Pages and Packages completed in 2025. Core platform and databases began in October 2025 and are in progress, with traffic split between the legacy Github data center and Azure.
- ifwinterco 8mo agoThat's probably partly why things have got increasingly flaky - until they finish there'll be constant background cognitive load and surface area for bugs from the fact everything (especially the data) is half-migrated
- panarky 8mo agoYou'd think so, and we don't know about today's incident yet, but recent Github incidents have been attributed specifically to Azure, and Azure itself has had a lot of downtime recently that lasts for many hours.
- ifwinterco 8mo agoTrue, the even simpler explanation is what they've migrated to is itself just unreliable
- pipo234 8mo agoThis has those Hotmail migration vibes off the early 2000s.
- jeffrallen 8mo agoAnd yet, somehow my wife still has a hotmail.com address 25 years later.
- showerst 8mo agoI'm sympathetic to ops issues, and particularly sympathetic to ops issues that are caused by brain-dead corporate mandates, but you don't get to be an infrastructure company and have this uptime record. It's extra galling that they advertise all the new buzzword laden AI pipeline features while the regular website and actions fail constantly. Academically I know that it's not the same people building those as fixing bugs and running infra, but the leadership is just clearly failing to properly steer the ship here.
- sgt 8mo agoIs there any reason why Github needs 99.99% uptime? You can continue working with your local repo.
- nullstyle 8mo agoThe money i pay them is the reason
- badgersnake 8mo agoLots of teams embraced actions to run their CI/CD, and GitHub reviews as part of their merge process. And copilot. Basically their SOC2 (or whatever) says they have to use GitHub. I’m guessing they’re regretting it.
- swiftcoder 8mo ago> Basically their SOC2 (or whatever) says they have to use GitHub Our SOC2 doesn't specify GitHub by name, but it does require we maintain a record of each PR having been reviewed. I guess in extremis we could email each other patch diffs, and CC the guy responsible for the audit process with the approval...
- onraglanroad 8mo agoThe Linux kernel uses an email based workflow. You can digitally sign email and add it to an immutable store that can be reviewed.
- sgt 8mo agoDoes SOC2 itself require that or just yours? I'm not too familiar with SOC2 but I know ISO 27001 quite well, and there's no PR specific "requirements" to speak of. But it is something that could be included in your secure development policy.
- badgersnake 8mo agoYeah, it’s what you write in the policy.
- imglorp 8mo agoI'm pretty sure they don't GAF about GH uptime as long as they can keep training models on it (0.5 /s), but Azure is revenue friction so might be a real problem. Something this week about "oops we need a quality czar": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46903802 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46903802
- joshstrange 8mo ago> (0.5 /s), Does this mean you are only half-sarcastic/half-joking? Or did I interpret that wrong?