Save that for your local mom-and-pop store: Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation with enough resources to, at the very least, provide a reliable service for enterprise clients.

The "AI is using a lot of resources" excuse was maybe acceptable last year but not in Q3 2026.

I have little sympathy that they're buckling over a problem they helped create.

The thing is Github’s core is git’s core plus extras, and thet core is fundamentally text wrangling.

Youtube and Insta and Facebook and many other social media platforms handle very resource intensive media for billions of people plus bots.

Increased influx from AI is not plausible when viewed from that lens.

> scaling problems due to the influx of LLM assisted coding

You mean people pushing LLM assisted coding, or github's own coders pushing LLM assisted code to production ? :-).

I am more inclined to think that it is the second, but if the reason is the first, what is particular hard to scale ? It's not like everybody is vide-coding into a single repository, so I would expect that most of the load would naturally be scalable by increasing the resources. If for some reason that is not possible, I would expect a corporation as big as Github to keep the paying customers working by gracefully denying service to the free tier, not to collapse like an house of cards.

Found this reddit thread from a month ago that talks about the scale:

   Commit volume went from 1 billion total in all of 2025 to 275 million per week by early 2026. 

The quality and performance of GitHub enterprise has degraded horribly this year. Their problems are self-inflicted and influx is just an excuse.

Despite minimal new features, and drastically increasing hardware resources to keep up, self-hosted GitHub enterprise went from things being instant to most requests taking many seconds. And activity on issues in one repository tends to mysteriously re-open issues with the same number in other repositories.

I think they are vibe coding and facing the consequences.

How many weeks/months can they use this excuse? They are literally are at the forefront of this emerging industry and are capturing untold value. To let their product suffer and potentially lose market share because of it is extremely foolish

They've had an insane influx. It seems that they should more aggressively limit free tier activity or isolate paid users, this has become unbearable...

That’s the reason they gave, and I believe them. But I also think there has to be more to it. If your paying users are seeing degradation caused by (likely) free tier users (for years by the way), restrict the free users.

Services like Facebook have orders of magnitude more activity than GitHub and manage much better uptime.

I'm really curious how other codeforges are faring. I only use codeberg and github - codeberg seems to have less outages, especially for a much smaller organisation, but they've recently removed support for LLM projects which could be linked.

Anyone here have data on whether the likes of gitlab have been impacted in the same was as github?

Considering their leadership ushered that in themselves, that’s just poor planning.

Isn't all the LLMs and AI supposed to be "solving these problems" because all the engineers are now 10x ? Not being sarcastic but I mean, this is what we were told and sold...by the likes of...Microsoft.

Even Claude could have caught and addressed most of these scalability issues long ago. This can’t be due to load or capacity. This is something else.

If they did, they would’ve paused new feature development a long time ago and redirected that resource towards scaling the platform. And yet they’ve been releasing tonedeaf features more than ever.

Enterprise software isn't about giving "breaks"; it's about does the product work for you or not.

It should be embarrassingly paralel I don't get how they can't figure out

I saw an HN comment a few weeks back claiming their traffic has increased ~10x.

Well, it has been 8 years since the acquisition and they have had access to Azure infrastructure to keep up with the scale and yet, it is still struggling due to free compute thanks to Actions.

They need to start getting rid of the free tiers for GitHub Actions and actually charge appropriately or increase prices for it.

They've done the typical sillicon valley sillyness of having 10 000 engineers over-engineer a product so that there's way too many features built on top of what should be a simple tool and are now paying the price. Literally every larger US company makes this mistake.