[ofrzeta]

It's frustrating that the so-called enterprise solutions are monsters. In a former workplace we were using Gogs for a long time. It's so nice to work with software that doesn't require a ton of resources for a relatively simple task.

[firesteelrain]

We are running GitLab Ultimate in three different environments. Like 2000 users each and each user pipeline runs crazy like hundreds amounts of jobs. GitLab is keeping up. But we are sized for the 40 RPS architecture

[moepstar]

> But we are sized for the 40 RPS architecture

Just in case anyone else (like me) didn't get the reference:

> This page describes the GitLab reference architecture designed to target a peak load of 40 requests per second (RPS), the typical peak load of up to 2,000 users, both manual and automated, based on real data.

https://docs.gitlab.com/administration/reference_architectur...

[jeduardo]

We used to run Gitlab Premium for around 300 users running hundreds of jobs over some monorepos. Gitlab suggested a small architecture using Omnibus, and while it helped a bit, it didn't perform as well under load as we expected it to.

Eventually, there was no virtual scaling that could help. This, for me, is the biggest problem with Gitlab hosting: as soon as you hit a scale where a single machine with Omnibus doesn't cut it, the jump in complexity, cost, and engineering hours is significant.

[firesteelrain]

Omnibus is like entry level. We paid for GitLab Professional Services and they recommended going to the larger architecture. Since then, we haven’t had issues.

They have their free fast stats tool and you can run your logs through their tool to get statistics and identify hotspots

[wiether]

My experience also.

I would never use Gitlab for my own needs, but at company level, it's impressive how well it behaves!