StatusGator last checked the status of Codeberg on July 31, 2026 at 7:57 PM CEST and the service was operational. There have been 83 user-submitted reports of outages in the past 24 hours, but the outage is now resolved.
Codeberg had a major outage today! About 7 hours of complete down (July 31, 2026)
https://statusgator.com/services/codeberg
27 Comments
jsnfwlr@lemmy.ml · 24 pts · 17d
Still better uptime than Github
FizzyOrange@programming.dev · 0 pts · 16d
I'm not sure it actually is. At best it is too early to tell.
spartanatreyu@programming.dev · 2 pts · 15d
Are you sure about that?
Github's "highscore" for consecutive days without incidents this year is 6.
https://www.dayswithoutgithubincident.com/
FizzyOrange@programming.dev · 2 pts · 15d
Yes but that tracks issues of all severities and with all of GitHub's services of which there are a great many. Also "days since incident" is a terrible metric because it doesn't capture how long the incidents last.
For example the latest incident is that copilot had degraded performance with Fable due to an Anthropic issue. It only last 18 minutes, only affected part of a part of their service, and it wasn't even their fault!
That's very different to "all of GitHub is down for 7 hours".
So yes. I am not sure GitHub is worse.
spartanatreyu@programming.dev · 0 pts · 14d
Yes. Remember there are two different main types of github users.
Users in the first group won't notice anything going wrong until only the services they use are affected.
Users in the second group experience full blown "intelligence brownouts" when any service goes down because they're coupled so strongly together. That's why that metric is useful (and also because it shows the true "number of nines" used in SLAs).
And, github is doing every insidious trick they know to push group 1 users into becoming group 2 users.
If github weren't trying to force users into the second group, then I think we could give them some more leeway here. But they're not, so yes github is much much worse.
If you want something a bit more granular, then you can check: https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/
Noughtmare@programming.dev · 15 pts · 18d
Not completely down; as a signed in user I didn't notice a thing.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 17d
Well, it was completely down in the sense that no operation was possible on the webpage. The page was just a single error code, so nothing to sign in possible. At least for me in Europe, the page and servers was out of service for about 7 hours or so (I tried over and over again, matching the experience with the graph). Maybe there were servers that was not affected at the time you logged in.
Noughtmare@programming.dev · 4 pts · 17d
I when I read reports of the downtime on mastodon I checked status.codeberg.org and saw that almost everything was a red line, except for the authenticated traffic. I guess I was lucky that I still had my cookies.
onlinepersona@programming.dev · 11 pts · 17d
Any official message from them? I thought they had a mastodon.
Edit: Lol the mastodon instance they're on is also down. And it's a German instance on a German cloud server. German engineering?
trem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 17d
On their status page, it says they were being hit by lots of unauthenticated traffic, so I would assume either AI scrapers or a DDoS: https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg
I put a screenshot here, in case they've cleared the warning: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/21576828
onlinepersona@programming.dev · 4 pts · 17d
AI companies, the gift that keeps on giving...
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 18d
They seem to be a bit flakey at the moment. There has also been an outage a week or two ago.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 18d
Yeah looks like its been a problem since last month, according to this graph. Today was the worst being completely shutdown for hours.
paraphrand@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 17d
Well, it wasn’t AI.
trem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 17d
I mean, their status page says they are/were seeing lots of unauthenticated traffic, which sounds like AI scrapers hitting them...
badmin@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 17d
If I want to move away from GitHub, and I don't like GitLab's bloatiness, or Codeberg's general vibe, what options do I have that are not run by someone in his basement?
I'm aware of radicale. And there is also a russian forge I saw some people flock to because of the DMCA mafia. But my repos are not that edgy 😉.
trem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 17d
I write this as a paying member of the Codeberg e.V., just so you know where my affiliation lays.
https://sr.ht/ is also reasonably popular, although the web interface is certainly a lot more minimal. SourceHut development and hosting of that instance and lots of other stuff is spearheaded by Drew DeVault. I have my disagreements with the guy technologically, but he holds solid views ethically, so passes the vibe check for me.
https://notabug.org/ has also been around for quite a few yeaes, and hosted by the https://peers.community/ non-profit. Alas:
Disroot also has a Forgejo instance: https://git.disroot.org/
Disroot is a community kind of pursuing decentralization and privacy online. Also been around for quite a few years by now.
badmin@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 17d
Thank you. I think I knew of disroot, but now I will bookmark them.
I also just remembered tangled, which would have been an interesting federated option, if a lot of people haven't decided to hate anything that touched the AT protocol.
😊
terabyterex@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 17d
popularity is going to love them very very hard.
they need someone with a highlevel of resiliency experience. code hosting isnt normal web traffic.
i am curious what its hosted on
graynk@discuss.tchncs.de · 8 pts · 17d
https://docs.codeberg.org/getting-started/faq/#where-is-codeberg-hosted
terabyterex@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 17d
well, that answers that question. they need to figure out a better solution.
chaospatterns@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 17d
Codeberg runs on Forgejo which is a fork of Gitea.
I'm running Forgejo myself and am running into difficulties with High Availability. Many data files can be stored in S3 compatible interfaces, but the Git repos are stored as Git files on disk. That's hard to distribute across multiple hosts. Something like NFS seems to be prone corruption and Forgejo has to be able to lock.
An open issue on clustering : https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/259
MoSal@programming.dev · 3 pts · 17d
Reading your comment, I immediately thought there must be an S3 FUSE wrapper out there, and quickly found this:
https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse
chaospatterns@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 17d
The problem is still concurrency. If the application, in this case the git CLI, is not thread-safe, then you could run into unsafe data mutations causing data corruption.
Imagine two pushes that come in around the same time. S3 doesn't have the locking mechanics you need to ensure that only one of those writes win and the other fails. You need to upload the individual commits (which can be isolated except in the case of multiple writes with a partial write), but then the branch and HEAD pointers have to be serialized. I've done a lot of work with distributed systems in AWS and my experience has always been to layer something like DynamoDB on-top of S3 to provide this.
My knowledge of at least one distributed Git system was that they had a fleet of Git data servers and a router on front. The router would fan it out to 3 or more data servers where each data server would store copies. But ultimately there's some application logic that is aware of the underlying filesystem and manages locking.
GitHub shares some of their architecture here: https://github.blog/engineering/infrastructure/stretching-spokes/
Kissaki@programming.dev · 4 pts · 17d
https://status.codeberg.org/status/codeberg
SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 17d
Servers eepy
Kissaki@programming.dev · 2 pts · 17d
Looks like StatusGator mentions "Codeberg reported an issue on their status page" multiple times, but links neither to the status page nor the reported incident? That seems… lacking.