Cases3 cases

1 to 3 of 3

1. IL-0305 Replicas of one Intercom Vitess shard hit 100% CPU and fell up to 2.2 hours behind, serving stale inbox data

   Intercom2026

   Symptoms

   From 17:03 UTC on January 27, 2026, a small subset of Intercom customers, fewer than 1%, saw inconsistent latency and stale data when reading from the platform. At 17:25 UTC an alarm on an excessive message backlog in a worker declared an incident automatically.

   Replication lagDatabase overloadHigh latency

   Trigger

   An internal app deletion process, running more concurrent deletion steps per app than usual with no rate limiting, and the ETL data pipeline both put heavy load on the same database shard at the same time.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   DatabaseDatabase replication

   Contributing factor

   No headroom

   Detection

   An alarm on an excessive message backlog in a worker fired at 17:25 UTC and declared an incident automatically.

   Remediation

   • Disabled ETL processing to reduce load on the affected shard
   • Scaled the app deletion workers to zero
   • Re-enabled ETL carefully once monitoring showed stable metrics

   Action items

   • Increase the capacity of shards to leave headroom for unexpected load spikes
   • Add rate limiting and resource controls to the app deletion process so it backs off when database load is high
   • Review how background work such as ETL and maintenance tasks competes with customer-facing operations for database capacity
   • Alert on replication lag earlier and link it to specific workloads
   • Communicate proactively with affected customers in incidents with a limited blast radius

   Lessons

   Because data is spread across many independent shards, the overload stayed on one shard and reached fewer than 1% of customers instead of the whole platform.

   View case
2. IL-0311 BattleMetrics' primary PostgreSQL went read-only at transaction ID wraparound, breaking the website and RCON updates

   BattleMetrics2022

   Symptoms

   At 03:23 UTC on 27 March 2022, BattleMetrics' primary PostgreSQL database, which holds all account, server and player information, went into read-only mode. Users first saw the website fail to load, and soon RCON updates and queries began to fail as well.

   Writes rejectedService outage

   Trigger

   A corruption of the index on the player identifiers table, which BattleMetrics' logs place at about 26 February 2022, made every vacuum job fail, so transaction IDs kept climbing until Postgres stopped accepting writes on 27 March.

   Root cause

   Data loss or corruption

   Component

   DatabasePostgreSQL vacuumDatabase replicationDatabase backups and snapshots

   Contributing factor

   Monitoring blind spotOverlapping failuresNo headroom

   Detection

   Users failed to load the website and reported it as their API keys expired, then RCON updates and queries began to fail, and the team found that the main database no longer accepted writes.

   Remediation

   • Shut the database down and dropped the corrupted player identifiers index in single-user mode
   • Ran the vacuum again, which succeeded and let the database accept writes
   • Rebuilt the player identifier index, which took about two hours
   • Shut down the query workers and gave RCON updates priority
   • Pointed services at the new Postgres primary
   • Bootstrapped new replicas one after another to take load off the primary
   • Restarted queries with throttling, prioritised by server population and rank, after RCON updates had caught up

   Action items

   • Monitor errors in the Postgres logs
   • Monitor and alert on transaction IDs
   • Set up a logical replica in addition to physical replication
   • Build a faster network to speed up recovery from failure

   Lessons

   BattleMetrics names skipping health checks on transaction ID size as its critical mistake: the index corruption silently broke vacuum for a month, and without monitoring of transaction IDs nobody saw the database approach wraparound. Because the corruption had been replicated to the replicas, failing over did not help, and the backup servers and downloadable backups carried the same corruption. The team also found that, contrary to the error message, a full vacuum on a server in wraparound protection does not need single-user mode, and chose to run a slow, delayed service over no service while replicas were rebuilt.

   View case
3. IL-0240 Cloudflare API requests failed and the dashboard slowed for hours after the authentication database lost its replicas

   Cloudflare2020

   Symptoms

   On 2 November 2020 the Cloudflare API and dashboard were degraded for six hours and 33 minutes. The success rate of API queries dropped at times to 75%, and the dashboard was up to 80 times slower than normal, while Cloudflare's edge network kept working.

   High error rateHigh latencyDatabase overloadWrites rejectedPacket loss

   Trigger

   At 14:43 UTC a network switch in a control plane data center partly failed: it kept LACP and BGP running but stopped forwarding some packets, and it recovered on its own six minutes later.

   Root cause

   DNS or network fault

   Component

   NIC, cable and switch port linkCoordination and key-value storeDatabase failover managerDatabaseDatabase replication

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationNo headroomHarmful manual action

   Detection

   At 14:43 UTC alerts fired because the misbehaving switch was unreachable to pings. Engineers then saw that the primary authentication database was overwhelmed.

   Remediation

   • Shed load from the primary authentication database by slowing SSL certificate pushes to the edge, emails and other features
   • Moved API traffic that could use read replicas to the secondary data center by hand
   • Sent authentication calls fully back to the primary data center when the dashboard got worse
   • Rebuilt the first database replica, which put itself back into service at 21:20 UTC and returned performance to normal
   • Ramped the turned-down services back up so asynchronous processing could catch up

   Action items

   • Remove the cluster management limitation that requires rebuilding all replicas after a primary is promoted
   • Redesign the user sessions system so dashboard traffic can be steered between data centers
   • Change the auto-remediation configuration so a database replica is not promoted so quickly
   • Tune each system involved to be more resilient to failures of its dependencies

   Lessons

   Every system in the chain had redundancy and none failed completely; each only degraded, which made the chain of events much harder to model and foresee. Automating replica promotion so that it could trigger on a minute's notice had been a point of pride, but for at least one database a fast promotion can do more harm than the failure it answers. Most general-purpose cluster managers use Raft or Paxos rather than Byzantine fault tolerant protocols, accepting a rare failure mode in exchange for a protocol that is simpler to implement correctly and debug.

   View case

By root cause3