Hacker News Reader

Exactly my experience as well: https://x.com/crohr/status/1732442731715113374

In the tests with my GitHub Action [1] that spawns ephemeral runners for any workflow, I found BuildJet bandwidth speed 10 to 20 times slower than machines at AWS.

[1]: https://github.com/runs-on/action

I’m currently evaluating Buildjet. I’m curious about this caching issue. Were you using actions/cache or buildjet/cache?

https://buildjet.com/for-github-actions/docs/guides/migratin...

We used BuildJet cache for months. It’s possible it was always broken and I only noticed a few days ago. I tried both and neither actually cached data. I even tried forking, and upgrading, the BuildJet variant to no avail.

I spent a solid couple hours trying to fix this before moving to WarpBuild.

You can continue to use actions/cache if using WarpBuild :)

Thanks for your trust! I'm here to ensure you have a good experience with WarpBuild and for feedback/requests.