Thread

1. arandomhuman · 1786035573 · focus · HN ↗

   I love how even self hosted workers don't work during these outages - running jobs on their infrastructure being flakey is marginally acceptable, but the API to simply schedule workflows having this availability is mind boggling. Github just doesn't seem like a serious company anymore.

   1. duped · 1786038068 · focus · HN ↗

      I'm not sure that it's that mind boggling. The entire complexity and value of GHA is not in the runners but the scheduler that the GH frontend hooks into and runners subscribe to jobs from. It's the most likely thing to fall over. '

      If the scheduling was self hosted it would be inexcusable but you can always just connect whatever you want to webhooks.

      1. packetlost · 1786038629 · focus · HN ↗

         That "scheduling" is just a git hook and a message queue, maybe with some database updates in between with very clear boundaries that make sharding easy to reason about, assuming they have a sane architecture (they evidently don't)

         1. jacobgold · 1786039160 · focus · HN ↗

            It's just silly to guess at how a system works, or should work, without digging into the details. Because you simply don't know what you don't know.

            1. packetlost · 1786039395 · focus · HN ↗

               The only statement I'm making about their system is that it appears to be poorly designed, as evident by their poor uptime. The rest is just visible details about what data is involved in performing the task at hand, agnostic to the implementation underlying it.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.