Hacker News Reader

Comment by Longwelwind | Hacker News Reader

I would wager that your self-hosted GitLab has less uptime than GitHub (or the quality of the deployment). We typically underestimate the downtime of the software we deploy ourselves, probably because we're attached to it, or because we're busy fixing it, instead of having to wait.

I'd take the occasional downtimes of cloud solutions, if it means not having to use some of the self-hosted software I had to to use at work.

View on HN

I'm managing a Gitlab instance for 10k users since 3 years, we had zero unplanned downtime in the last 3 years, I just had to apply the upgrade every 3 months and it's running smoothly ever since

If Github had planned downtime every 3 months people would scream bloody murder, so the point stands that github's uptime is almost surely better than someone who selfhosts.

Ironically enough, Github seems to have unplanned downtimes every 3 months!

Not really, it’s far better to have downtime at a time of your choosing than in the middle of a key time.

It’s why we run certain services in my department ourselves rather than central IT, because central IT thinks that the best time for planned downtime is 6pm, which is hilarious as for our department 5pm-11pm is the most critical time, and the best time to make changes is between 9 and 12 when the services are least important (not that we have a full outage, but we can have a degraded outage - our internet service for half of our equipment can take upto 20 seconds to fail over, and not every end device is dual connected)

FYI the planned downtime for upgrade is 5mn every 3 months done on Saturday night, I believe our instance uptime is much better than GitHub uptime Of course we are using it only for 10k users not for millions like GitHub

Nope. Been self-hosting for four years without any issues.

We only do security upgrades or wait for x.1 upgrades. Never x.0

The hosted .com however I wouldn't recommend.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com