Cases3 cases

1 to 3 of 3

1. IL-0471 GitHub Actions runs failed or sat queued for 9 hours after a routine deployment's pod replacement saturated capacity

   GitHub2026

   Symptoms

   From 15:05 UTC on 6 August 2026 GitHub Actions workflow runs failed to start, failed partway through or stayed queued for a long time, on both GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runners. Some requests to the Actions REST API returned errors, and some customers saw unexpected rate limiting in their workflows.

   High error rateHigh latency

   Trigger

   A routine deployment to an internal Actions service that processes events and generates Actions jobs replaced pods, and the remaining capacity became saturated.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   CI system

   Contributing factor

   No headroomExcessive blast radiusHarmful manual action

   Remediation

   • Expanded capacity of the affected services
   • Throttled incoming webhook-triggered work
   • Increased processing capacity for the backlog of affected events
   • Deployed changes that stopped runners from repeatedly trying to acquire invalid jobs
   • Deployed a fix for self-hosted runners that were not picking up jobs and enabled it incrementally
   • Paused migrations with GitHub Enterprise Importer
   • Restored webhook-triggered Actions workflows to full throughput
   • Rolled back the mitigation that left some ARC runners offline, and recovered those runners by hand
   • Shared CLI and UI steps for customers to clear jobs that could not be retried or canceled

   Action items

   • Improve deployment and capacity safeguards for the affected services
   • Strengthen monitoring for the conditions that preceded the incident
   • Improve the resiliency and recovery of queued work and runner assignment
   • Add automatic recovery for self-hosted runners in upcoming Runner and ARC releases
   • Reduce the risk of cascading failures and speed up recovery during large Actions disruptions

   View case
2. IL-0324 Three MediaWiki deployments lost Memcached after a PHP 8.1 rollout and overloaded the External Storage database cluster

   Wikimedia Foundation2025

   Symptoms

   On 2025-03-12 from 10:58 UTC, alerts for high backend response times came in, and the MediaWiki deployments mw-api-int, mw-parsoid and mw-jobrunner, which serve MediaWiki for non-user-facing purposes, showed high latency and database errors. The External Storage cluster, whose hosts store the compressed text of wiki page revisions, had a sharp rise in load and connections. The same happened again on 2025-03-13 from 11:15 UTC.

   Database overloadHigh latencyHigh error rateLog floodMonitoring outage

   Trigger

   At 10:44 UTC on 12 March a Scap deployment of the PHP 8.1 rollout for mw-api-int, mw-parsoid and mw-jobrunner was run with the flag -Dbuild_mw_container_image:False; the rollout was deployed with Scap again at 11:15 UTC on 13 March.

   Root cause

   Faulty deployment

   Component

   DatabaseIn-memory cacheConfigMaps and SecretsHelmCI system

   Contributing factor

   Unverified assumptionDependence on a warm cacheSignal buried in noise

   Detection

   Alerts for high backend response times started at 10:58 UTC on 12 March, 14 minutes after the Scap deployment; 2 on-call engineers were paged. The MediaWikiMemcachedHighErrorRate alert that pointed at the cause fired only briefly because its log pipeline was overloaded.

   Remediation

   • Deployed a patch to cirrus-streaming-updater that reduced SUP parallelism
   • Reduced the concurrency of the categoryMembershipChange job in changeprop-jobqueue
   • On 12 March, reverted 1126607 and 1126650 and re-ran Scap
   • On 13 March, rolling-restarted changeprop-jobqueue
   • Rolling-restarted mw-api-int
   • Disabled the categorymembership job in changeprop-jobqueue
   • Reverted 1127476 and 1127478
   • Redeployed mw-api-int to pick up the revert
   • Increased the number of mw-api-int replicas
   • Redeployed mw-jobrunner to pick up the revert
   • Redeployed mw-parsoid to pick up the revert

   Action items

   • Reduce the number of messages sent through channel:Memcached during failures
   • Add helm rollback functionality to Scap
   • Decide whether Scap should update helmfile-defaults when -Dbuild_mw_container_image:False is set
   • Consider removing envvars.inc from MediaWiki images
   • Consider "Why" dashboards that give an overview of a group of related components together with relevant links to follow
   • Coordinate incident responders better
   • Be able to work with MediaWiki developers during incidents

   Lessons

   The write-up puts the weight not on the technical root cause but on why the team could not see, even after the 12 March incident, that three MediaWiki deployments were running without Memcached. Alert dashboards showed what was happening, such as many busy PHP workers, but not why; dashboards linking components that affect each other, such as SQLBlobStore keys and External Storage, would have helped. The alert that pointed in the right direction did not stay firing and would probably have been lost among 78 others. The incident coordinator could not tell who was working on what or who had joined or left, the channels were noisy, the external impact was judged more critical than it was, and trace.wikimedia.org was not used although it might have helped.

   View case
3. IL-0466 Prow scheduled test job pods onto its service cluster, leaving hundreds Pending and starving Prow's own services

   Kubernetes project2019

   Symptoms

   On 8 February 2019 the Kubernetes project's Prow instance at prow.k8s.io became very slow: its controllers took about five minutes to respond to the hook, bot commands such as the cat command stopped working, and the prow.k8s.io site was hard to reach. GitHub status was normal, and the Prow service nodes were found running above 100% of CPU and memory.

   Pods PendingSustained high node CPUHigh latency

   Trigger

   At 13:20 PST an auto-generated bump PR for Prow was merged and deployed, and Prow started scheduling workloads onto the service cluster.

   Root cause

   Faulty deployment

   Component

   CI system

   Contributing factor

   Unrepresentative stagingNo resource requests or limitsLimited debug access

   Detection

   While working on a PR, a maintainer noticed the bot's cat command failing, found GitHub status normal, learned on Slack that the Prow nodes were above 100% CPU and memory, and then found 600 pending pods in the test-pods namespace.

   Remediation

   • Rolled Prow back to v20190206-b01b288 and cleaned up the pods and ProwJobs in the service cluster
   • Applied the revert by hand with kubectl apply after the deployment permission was missing
   • Sent a fix, PR 11209, so the client no longer overwrites a provided literal default client
   • Rolled Prow back to v20190125-2aca69d, from before the bug was introduced
   • Cleaned up the wrongly scheduled pods and ProwJobs again and confirmed Prow was healthy

   Action items

   • Find out why the bug did not show deterministically
   • Be more careful with sweeping Prow changes, with more end-to-end tests or a real staging Prow

   Lessons

   The behaviour was not deterministic, and the change was deployed on a Friday afternoon. Prow instances are set up differently, for example in how build clusters are defined, so another project's Prow running a version fine does not show it is safe for the Kubernetes Prow, which needs a staging environment that looks like it.

   View case

By root cause2