Incident Library
  • Root cause
  • Component
  • Symptom
  • Contributing factor
  • Case

Cases11 cases

8 to 11 of 11

  1. Symptoms

    A user of the LIS JupyterHub reported a "backoff after failed scale-up" error, and user servers would not start. An engineer opened incident #36, "LIS hub cannot scale", at 5:40 AM Pacific on 14 November 2022.

    Trigger

    At 10 AM UK time on 14 November 2022, the B zone of Google Cloud's europe-west2 region (London) ran out of resources to allocate. The LIS cluster's nodes were restricted to that zone.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    A user reported the "backoff after failed scale-up" error; an engineer opened the incident at 5:40 AM Pacific, about three hours and forty minutes after the zone ran out of resources.

    Remediation
    • edited the node pool in the GCP console to allow node creation in the A and C zones of europe-west2, which were not exhausted
    Action items
    • Either restrict the node pool back to the B zone after the Black Friday event, or move the cluster and the NFS Filestore to the A zone (infrastructure issue #1944)
    • Investigate an enterprise plan that allows a regional NFS, at higher cost (infrastructure issue #1945)
    • Make sure PagerDuty notifications always get through to engineers (team-compass issue #574)
    Lessons

    A node pool pinned to one zone for storage performance cannot scale when the cloud provider runs out of capacity in that zone. The autoscaler's "backoff after failed scale-up" message usually points to quotas, and raising quotas does nothing here; the ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED error in the logs is what identifies a zone without capacity. The review found that one engineer wearing many hats (incident commander, comms and debugging), with pages not reaching the other responders, made the response harder; a team response would have given more support.

  2. Symptoms

    At 08:05 UTC on 2021-06-21 the API service's Apdex (the share of requests that finish within a target time) and Rails request queuing began trending the wrong way. At 09:01 the team found the API deployment unhealthy: it needed more pods for the day's growing traffic, but no new nodes could be added to give it pod capacity. Users saw slow responses; the review found no sign that error rates rose.

    Trigger

    Google Cloud ran out of SSD persistent disk stock in us-east1, the region GitLab.com runs in, while the API service needed more nodes for rising user traffic.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    There was no alert on resource availability. Apdex and Rails queuing began trending the wrong way at 08:05 UTC and an engineer declared the incident in Slack at 08:43; finding the cause took a lot of log digging: cluster autoscaler errors about node pools in backoff, then ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED at the instance-group level, and finally Google Cloud support naming SSD as the exhausted resource.

    Remediation
    • added a node pool that uses pd-standard disks
    • scaled the new node pool by hand across all three zones to relieve the API
    • brought more pd-standard node pools online for the other blocked workloads
    • stopped production deployments and opened a Google Cloud support case about the cluster autoscaler not working with the new node pools
    • changed node pools and nodeSelectors so the remaining workloads ran on pd-standard nodes
    • removed the SSD-backed node pools after a day without problems
    Action items
    • Move Kubernetes services to pd-standard disks (delivery#1837)
    • Capture resource exhaustion errors as a metric
    Lessons

    A cloud region can run out of one specific resource, here SSD persistent disks, and the only error may be a generic ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED that does not name it. GitLab could neither monitor nor reserve resource availability, so detection took 22 hours and the cause came from Google Cloud support. The workloads ran fine on pd-standard disks. A second problem found on the way, a cluster autoscaler that does not fall back to another matching node pool when one cannot scale, slowed the move to the new node pools.

  3. Symptoms

    A colleague wrote in Slack that his application was taking a long time to deploy. A deployment that normally finishes in minutes had been running for about an hour: about half of the new pods were running and serving traffic, and the other half were Pending.

    Trigger

    The cluster reaching 256 nodes, the most its /16 pod secondary range could hold at 256 addresses per node; every further node creation failed.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    A colleague reported in Slack that a deployment was slow; the pending pods' events and the cluster autoscaler status ConfigMap showed the exhausted IP space.

    Remediation
    • lowered the maximum pods per node on selected node pools, cutting IP consumption by about 30%
    • moved some node pools to larger instance types
    Action items
    • Lower the maximum pods per node on node pools that do not run many pods
    • Use larger instance types in some node pools
    Lessons

    In a VPC-native GKE cluster the number of nodes, not the number of pods, uses up the pod range: by default each node reserves 256 addresses, so even a /16 is full at 256 nodes. Maximum pods per node and node size are the practical levers; larger nodes pack better but take more pods down when they fail.

  4. Symptoms

    On the evening of a long-overdue upgrade of a loveholidays production GKE cluster from 1.10.X to 1.12.5-gke.10, planned to take 2 to 2.5 hours, the master upgrade and the first two 7-node NodePools went smoothly. After that the NodePool upgrades slowed to a crawl. Each node is cordoned, drained and upgraded in turn. Even a 14-node cluster at about 5 minutes per node took over an hour, and with about 100 more nodes to go, some of them taking over 15 minutes to drain, the sequential drains were too slow to finish at a reasonable hour.

    Trigger

    A manual upgrade of the GKE masters and NodePools from 1.10.X to 1.12.5-gke.10, two versions at once, on 19 March 2019; GKE's release notes of 14 March had already said that version was no longer available for new clusters or master upgrades because masters showed elevated error rates, but it could still be selected.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    The slow drains, zombie nodes and stuck NodePool were seen by the engineer running the upgrade; the broken Ingress was noticed after the upgrade and explained by Google support; the HPA problem was noticed the next day.

    Remediation
    • drained the remaining NodePool nodes ahead of the upgrade with kubectl drain --ignore-daemonsets --delete-local-data
    • deleted the zombie instances from the managed instance group with gcloud compute instance-groups managed delete-instances
    • cancelled the stuck UPGRADE_NODES operation with gcloud beta container operations cancel
    • used kubectl port-forward in place of the broken internal Ingresses
    • scaled down the older of two active ReplicaSets, or triggered a dummy deployment, to bring the HPA back
    Action items
    • Alert when a HorizontalPodAutoscaler is at 70% and at 100% of its capacity
    • Alert when a deployment has had two active ReplicaSets for 30 minutes and for 60 minutes
    • Re-evaluate termination grace periods that were set to arbitrary large values
    • Read the GKE release notes before every cluster upgrade
    • Use auto-upgrade in non-production environments, and manual cluster upgrades with automatic node upgrades in production
    • Keep environments as identical as possible, including resource names
    Lessons

    Read the release notes before upgrading: the target version had been withdrawn five days earlier. Drain time depends on pod configuration, so emptyDir volumes, long grace periods and missing disruption budgets turn a NodePool upgrade into hours. Pre-production only catches problems like the ingress bug if it matches production down to resource names. Auto-upgrades in non-production surface problems early, and a mix of manual cluster upgrades and automatic node upgrades in production keeps clusters current without much effort.

Check your cluster for this

These 11 cases involve Cluster autoscaler and Node pool. kubegap audits a Kubernetes cluster for gaps like these, read-only, from Claude Code or Codex; its checks cite public reports like the ones in this library.

By root cause6

Faulty deployment2 cases

  1. IL-0166 A compute host update removed the credential parser used to decode StackScripts, so new Linodes and every new LKE and LKE-E node failed to boot and autoscaling and node recycling failed in all regions
    Linode2026
  2. IL-0020 During an EKS 1.30 upgrade the descheduler tried to reschedule every pod on the cordoned nodes at once and production workloads went down

Breaking change in an upgrade1 case

Organisation
  1. IL-0097 A cluster autoscaler version bump was incompatible with the one cluster still on Kubernetes 1.33, so no scale-up events fired and new nodes were not created
    2i2c2026

Certificate or credential expiry1 case

Contributing factor
Organisation
  1. IL-0156 Revoking old certificates after a rotation left a certificate key mismatch between API endpoints and the cluster controller, and LKE cluster management and autoscaling in Atlanta returned 5xx errors
    Linode2025

Capacity exhaustion2 cases

Organisation
  1. IL-0006 VPC subnets ran out of IP addresses because the AWS VPC CNI kept IPs on full nodes, and WARM_IP_TARGET changes then blocked pod starts after every pod deletion
    Neon2025
  2. IL-0015 A GKE cluster's /16 pod address range ran out at 256 nodes, leaving new pods Pending and node scale-ups failing

Software defect2 cases

  1. IL-0157 After a release, new nodes could not join Linode Kubernetes Engine clusters with IP ACL enabled, so autoscaling failed on about 20 to 25 clusters
    Linode2025
  2. IL-0024 Expensive cache-backed API calls and uncancelled database requests overloaded MongoDB and took the Hugging Face Hub down three times

Cloud provider outage3 cases

  1. IL-0096 A GKE node pool pinned to the europe-west2-b zone could not scale for 6.5 hours because Google ran out of resources in that zone (ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED)
    2i2c2022
  2. IL-0205 The GKE cluster autoscaler could not add nodes to GitLab.com's production cluster because Google Cloud ran out of SSD persistent disks in us-east1
    GitLab2021
  3. IL-0014 A GKE upgrade to a withdrawn version stalled on slow drains and a stuck node pool, then broke an ingress and confused the HPA