Comment by bdcravens
6 years ago
> SourceHut over GitHub as a service which can be expected to have better uptime and performance, because it is a fact
Most of us could throw any of the open source solutions on a $20 Linode instance and probably have excellent uptime. How many active repos do you host, and on how many servers?
About 18K git & hg repositories, for about 13.5K users. We also run about 5,000 CI jobs per week, including for some large projects like Nim and Zig, Neovim, OpenSMTPD, etc. We have 10 dedicated servers at the moment. And I didn't throw an open source solution on these servers - I built these open source services from the ground up.
So you're comparing your scalability with a company with over 40m users and 100m repos.
Can you talk about the geographic distribution of your 10 servers?
I would like to remind you of my earlier point:
SourceHut is not the same scale as GitHub. This does not change the fact that SourceHut is faster and more reliable. We have an advantage - fewer users and repos - but still, that doesn't change the fact that we're faster and more reliable.
This has been objectively demonstrated as a numerical fact:
https://forgeperf.org
And yes, 9 of those servers are in Philadelphia (the other is in San Franscisco, but it's for backups, not distribution). That doesn't change the fact that, despite being more distant from many users, our pages load faster. In this respect, we have a disadvantage from GitHub, but we're still faster.
GitHub and Sourcehut are working at different scales. That doesn't change the fact that SourceHut is faster.
4 replies →