Cases43 cases

33 to 37 of 43

1. IL-0061 A Terraform pull request merged out of order deleted a production GKE cluster, and recreating it deleted a second one

   Spotify2019

   Symptoms

   Terraform, applied from the shared cluster configuration repository after a merge, deleted Spotify's production GKE cluster in Asia. While the team tried to recreate it, Terraform deleted a second production cluster, so two of the three production clusters were gone.

   Resources deleted

   Trigger

   A feature team's pull request that added three users to an existing RBAC role binding file was merged before the cluster operators' pull request that imported the Asia cluster into Terraform state. The review build of the import pull request had already written the cluster into the shared state file, and the merged configuration had no definition of the Asia cluster, so Terraform removed it.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   TerraformCI systemGKE control plane

   Contributing factor

   No safeguard on destructive changeMissed in reviewUnverified assumption

   Detection

   Internal service discovery could not reach the deleted cluster and the cluster operator team was paged.

   Remediation

   • removed the deleted clusters from the service discovery configuration and restarted service discovery so clients fell back to the instances outside Kubernetes
   • one team that ran half on Kubernetes and half on VMs created more VMs outside Kubernetes to handle the load
   • recreated the clusters, using the hourly backups
   • updated the places where the old clusters' master IPs were hardcoded

   Action items

   • Post the Terraform dry-run output as a comment on each pull request
   • Require a status check that the branch is up to date with master, so the dry run reflects what will actually happen
   • Require an approving review on pull requests
   • Fail reviews automatically when certain keywords such as destroy appear; cluster deletions are done manually outside this repository
   • Add linters and validators for the cluster configuration
   • Schedule and announce disaster recovery tests that cover a cluster going away and smaller failures

   Lessons

   Plan for failure from the start and migrate large infrastructure gradually, so there is redundancy and a way back. A backup whose restore has never been tested is not a backup. Practising disaster recovery paid off: restoring the first deleted cluster took three and a quarter hours, and the team can now restore a larger cluster in one hour. What matters is not who made the mistake but what was learned from it.

   View case
2. IL-0066 Broken ConfigMap change lay dormant for weeks, then took down Pusher's edge proxy when a cluster upgrade replaced its pods

   Pusher2019

   Symptoms

   During a cluster upgrade, all traffic to Pusher's products stopped. The speaker recalls that requests were failing with 500 errors.

   Service outageHigh error rate

   Trigger

   A cluster upgrade replaced nodes, so the bridge pods restarted and loaded a ConfigMap that had been changed three or four weeks earlier.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   ConfigMaps and Secrets

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effectUnverified assumption

   Action items

   • Build and run Wave so that changes to ConfigMaps and Secrets roll out new pods immediately

   Lessons

   A ConfigMap change does not restart the pods that use it, so for an application that cannot reload its configuration the change takes effect only when pods are next replaced, possibly weeks later during unrelated work. Tie configuration to the pod template so a bad change fails at the moment it is made.

   View case
3. IL-0011 HAProxy ingress piled requests onto the same pods because a Go template visited the backend map in sorted pod IP order

   Skyscanner2019

   Symptoms

   On a Sunday, a team using one of Skyscanner's Kubernetes clusters manually paged the out-of-hours Kubernetes support because their service showed elevated latency, worst at the p90 and maximum levels.

   High latencyLoad imbalanceOOMKilledIntermittent connection failures

   Trigger

   Upgrading the HAProxy ingress controller to v0.6 and going back from Service virtual IPs to individual pod IPs as backends, on the understanding that the sort-backends flag introduced in v0.5, false by default, meant backends were randomly shuffled.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerHAProxyConfiguration templating

   Contributing factor

   Unrepresentative stagingUnverified assumptionIgnored early signal

   Detection

   A cluster user manually paged the out-of-hours Kubernetes support about elevated latency; Prometheus queries then showed the uneven request distribution across pods.

   Remediation

   • switched the affected service from pod IPs back to the Service virtual IP through a config change in the internal deployment tool Slingshot
   • patched the controller to keep each backend's servers in an insertion-ordered slice and changed the template to iterate over that slice
   • tested the patch in sandbox clusters and rolled it out to the production clusters

   Action items

   • Run the internal controller patch in production and return to pod IPs as the default backends
   • Raise the problem upstream with a GitHub issue and pull request
   • Test changes to cluster components against the specific behaviour and conditions that matter

   Lessons

   The team already knew that sorted backends cause hot-podding and still did not test the new flag well enough to see that it did not work; changes to cluster components need tests aimed at the exact behaviour that matters, under conditions like production. A keyword can behave differently in different parts of a language: range over a map is unordered in Go code but sorted in text/template. A small cluster component can do outsized harm to every user of the cluster and, in the end, to customers.

   View case
4. IL-0467 Boskos crash-looped after a node drain started it from a buggy StatefulSet image, failing Kubernetes PR jobs for 9 hours

   Kubernetes project2019

   Symptoms

   Overnight into 26 March 2019 (PDT), every Prow test job that needed a GCP project from Boskos, the Kubernetes test-infra service that hands out GCP projects to test jobs, failed. The required job pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce failed on every run, so no pull request could be merged in kubernetes/kubernetes for just over nine hours, and other projects saw similar failures.

   Container crash loopService outage

   Trigger

   At 23:04 PDT the node running the only Boskos pod was drained to be replaced with a 1.13 node during the upgrade of the Prow clusters from Kubernetes 1.11 to 1.13. The replacement pod started from the StatefulSet's current spec, which named a newer Boskos image containing the bug.

   Root cause

   Faulty deployment

   Component

   CI systemNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effectUnverified assumptionSingle point of failureNo alert on limitChange started before off-hours

   Detection

   Users reported the failure on GitHub at 02:50 and on Slack at 05:16 and 06:27, and an engineer saw the Slack reports on waking at 07:16. The Boskos monitoring dashboard showed the failure, but no alert caught it.

   Remediation

   • Built and deployed a new Boskos image with the bug fixed
   • Cleaned up the GCP projects that had been left open

   Action items

   • Change the Boskos configuration so that deployments actually take effect (#11956)
   • Automate Boskos deploys (#11957)
   • Improve alerting on Boskos status (#11953)

   Lessons

   The write-up lists what went poorly: a ten-hour upgrade was started shortly after 17:00 when on-call coverage ended at 18:00; deployments were not checked to confirm that something had actually rolled out; the Boskos StatefulSet was not set up to perform updates, so changing its spec left the old pod running; the December change appears never to have been tested; and Boskos was deployed by hand, unlike most of Prow, which left more room for error. Once people were available, the problem was fixed quickly.

   View case
5. IL-0054 All ingress traffic lost while draining a GKE node pool because the load balancer only targeted new nodes without ingress-nginx pods

   DevOps Hof2019

   Symptoms

   While the old nodes of a GKE cluster were being drained to move workloads to a newly created node pool, none of the services in the cluster could be reached through ingress-nginx any more.

   Service outageProbe failures

   Trigger

   Cordoning and draining the old node pool removed those nodes from the GCP load balancer backend while the ingress-nginx pods were still running on them.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   Ingress controllerkube-proxyNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsUnverified assumption

   Detection

   The team noticed during the drain that no service in the cluster was reachable through ingress-nginx.

   Remediation

   • deleted the nginx-ingress-controller pods still running on the old nodes so they were rescheduled on the new, ready nodes

   Lessons

   With externalTrafficPolicy: Local, the load balancer can only reach nodes that run an ingress pod, and cordoned nodes leave the load balancer backend immediately; if the ingress pods stay behind on cordoned nodes, all ingress traffic stops. Before any change that might touch traffic, look twice into the documentation.

   View case

By root cause10