Cases29 cases

9 to 13 of 29

1. IL-0182 Too few CoreDNS replicas on EKS were overloaded during traffic spikes, raising latency and cutting the network for task pods, and the over-provisioned, tightly spread CoreDNS pods added later blocked Karpenter consolidation

   이언철2024

   Symptoms

   When traffic changed sharply, CoreDNS came under heavy load, and the cluster saw network problems and a sudden rise in latency. The horizontal pod autoscaler then added pods, database connections surged, and the impact spread to the whole service.

   High latencyIntermittent connection failuresAutoscaler misbehaviour

   Trigger

   Sharp changes in traffic loaded the small number of CoreDNS pods beyond what they could handle.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   CoreDNSKarpenterHorizontal pod autoscalerPod scheduling and placement

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationHarmful manual action

   Remediation

   • Set up the Cluster Proportional Autoscaler for CoreDNS with nodesPerReplica and coresPerReplica chosen for the instance types in use
   • Spread CoreDNS with soft topologySpreadConstraints (ScheduleAnyway) instead of anti-affinity so Karpenter could consolidate nodes
   • Added alert thresholds on CoreDNS error rate, panics, request duration and request rate
   • Deployed NodeLocal DNSCache so each node answers DNS from a local cache and forwards misses to the main CoreDNS

   Lessons

   A fixed, small number of CoreDNS pods cannot follow a cluster whose nodes and pods change quickly with traffic, and the damage spreads: DNS latency triggers autoscaling, which in turn floods the database with connections. Simply adding many CoreDNS replicas created a different problem, because with tainted nodes and a maxSkew: 1 spread constraint the pods piled onto a few nodes and blocked Karpenter consolidation. Scaling CoreDNS in proportion to the cluster and putting a DNS cache on every node handled both.

   View case
2. IL-0021 GKE GPU nodes on Container-Optimized OS could not download NVIDIA drivers (403 Forbidden) and came up without working GPUs

   Google Cloud2024

   Symptoms

   From 08:00 US/Pacific on 12 March 2024, GKE GPU nodes running Container-Optimized OS (COS) that were newly created or recreated came up with GPU drivers that did not work, so workloads that used the GPUs could not run. GKE showed elevated errors.

   GPU unavailableNode NotReady

   Root cause

   Dependency failure

   Component

   GPU driverNode operating system imageNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplification

   Detection

   The report does not say how Google detected the issue. Affected users saw "Failed to download GPU driver installer, status: 403 Forbidden" on the GPU node when installing the driver.

   Remediation

   • Halted automatic node recreations, which attempt GPU driver downloads, until the issue was mitigated
   • Worked with the driver partner to resolve access to the driver download bucket

   Lessons

   The status page report states no lessons or follow-up actions.

   View case
3. IL-0168 Simultaneous cluster auto-upgrades overloaded Scaleway's Kubernetes API, and a node authentication retry loop kept Kapsule and Kosmos nodes NotReady in FR-PAR

   Scaleway2024

   Symptoms

   At 01:04 CET on 13 February 2024, the Kubernetes API behind Scaleway's managed Kubernetes services Kapsule and Kosmos in the Paris region (FR-PAR) spiked in RAM and CPU use and ran out of memory. Nodes in FR-PAR could no longer authenticate to their control plane, and some of them went "Not Ready". Customers on both shared (mutualized) and dedicated environments were affected.

   Node NotReadyControl plane lagOOMKilled

   Trigger

   A new Kubernetes release was made available to all users on 12 February 2024, and during the night of 12 to 13 February many clusters triggered their auto-upgrade at the same time.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Kubernetes API server

   Contributing factor

   Retry stormAutomation amplificationNo staged rollout

   Detection

   The timeline's first entry, at 01:04 CET, records the Kubernetes API's RAM and CPU spikes and out-of-memory state, with nodes unable to authenticate to their control plane and some becoming "Not Ready". The first recorded action, 42 minutes later at 01:46, was to increase the resources allocated to the API.

   Remediation

   • increased the resources allocated to the Kubernetes API at 01:46 and again at 02:20
   • applied API traffic restrictions at 02:30 to smooth the incoming traffic
   • removed the traffic restrictions progressively in 50-100 batches from 03:20
   • ran a script at 03:40 to replace the failing nodes created during the congestion
   • rolled back to the former node authentication mechanism, first on a subset of clusters from 15:45 and on all clusters by 19:41 on 19 February
   • disabled cluster upgrade and configuration update features until 10:30 on 20 February

   Action items

   • Increase the resources allocated to the Kubernetes API
   • Roll back to the former node authentication mechanism
   • Implement a local authentication cache on nodes
   • Rework the resource allocation strategy to behave better under load spikes
   • Add new request queuing mechanisms for Kubernetes
   • Separate the different components to reduce side effects under high load or failure
   • Monitor selected metrics closely to identify anomalous patterns earlier
   • Refund customers who deployed nodes during the incident but could not use them normally

   Lessons

   Letting many clusters auto-upgrade at the same moment after a release turns routine upgrades into one coordinated load spike on the shared Kubernetes API. A node authentication mechanism that retries without letting up turns a slow API into an unavailable one, and auto-healing that replaces NotReady nodes amplifies the problem. The congestion pattern had already appeared three weeks earlier, and short-term mitigations did not stop it from recurring, so Scaleway rolled back the new authentication mechanism. Scaleway notes that as the number of customer clusters and nodes grows sharply, traffic control mechanisms have to improve to prevent congestion.

   View case
4. IL-0152 An incorrect configuration applied during maintenance made an internal infrastructure cluster automatically delete the control planes of 200 DOKS clusters in FRA1

   DigitalOcean2024

   Symptoms

   At 13:02 UTC on 2024-01-23 DigitalOcean posted that, as of 12:18 UTC, its engineers were investigating an issue with Kubernetes clusters in the FRA1 region and that users might see errors when communicating with their clusters. The control planes of the affected DOKS (DigitalOcean Kubernetes) clusters had become inaccessible.

   Resources deletedControl plane unresponsive

   Trigger

   An incorrect configuration was applied to an internal infrastructure cluster in FRA1 at 12:21 UTC during a maintenance operation.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   etcdKubernetes API server

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationNo safeguard on destructive changeExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Engineers were investigating errors with Kubernetes clusters in FRA1 as of 12:18 UTC and identified the incorrect configuration as the cause at 12:36.

   Remediation

   • restored each affected cluster's etcd from its latest twice-daily backup
   • restored the stateless control plane components after etcd
   • patched the recovery mechanism after unexpected problems during recovery
   • found and fixed an additional small bug during recovery
   • contacted affected customers directly with further instructions, since some might need to reconfigure Kubernetes resources

   Action items

   • Prevent automatic deletion of infrastructure cluster resources under any circumstances in the production environment

   Lessons

   When managed control planes run as resources in another cluster, one configuration mistake in that cluster can delete hundreds of control planes at once through ordinary automation. The etcd backups limited the damage, but their twice-daily schedule set the worst case at 12 hours of lost control plane state, and the recovery tooling itself needed patching during the incident.

   View case
5. IL-0202 A burst of queries and database writes exhausted connection pools and memory on Honeycomb's ingest hosts, and Kubernetes crash-loop back-off kept failed hosts offline so ingest capacity stayed too low to recover

   Honeycomb2023sev1

   Symptoms

   Standard alerting paged Honeycomb's on-call engineers about the performance and stability of event ingestion, and the automated load-shedding mechanisms tripped and sent further notifications. The status page described a higher than normal error rate and response time on the ingestion service.

   High error rateHigh latencyContainer crash loopService outageDatabase overload

   Trigger

   An abnormally large number of queries arrived from many separate connections within a few minutes.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Application databaseIn-memory cache

   Contributing factor

   Retry stormAutomation amplification

   Detection

   Standard alerting notified the on-call engineers about ingestion performance and stability, and the automated load-shedding mechanisms added notifications when they tripped. The first status post, about alerts on a higher than normal error rate and response time, went up at 18:28 PST (02:28 UTC), 13 minutes after the 02:15 UTC start.

   Remediation

   • Scaled the ingest fleet up manually and aggressively
   • Cut off most ingest for a few minutes so the ingest hosts could come back with enough capacity
   • Temporarily lowered the rate limits for the most aggressive traffic sources until their traffic subsided

   Action items

   • Keep the ingest fleet scaled up to prevent a repeat while longer-term fixes are worked on
   • Decide on the projects that will address these failure paths

   Lessons

   Load shedding and auto-scaling were in place, yet a burst that arrived faster than the cache could spread its writes still took the ingest hosts down. During recovery, Kubernetes' crash loop back-off worked against the operators: the hosts that had failed stayed offline while the fleet needed every host. Clients that retry whole OTel batches after a partial drop can multiply traffic many times over, so per-source rate limits were what finally stabilised ingest.

   View case

By root cause7