Cases3 cases

1 to 3 of 3

1. IL-0286 An exercise cleanup destroyed Honeycomb's Kafka brokers, leaving partitions leaderless and ingest crash-looping

   Honeycomb2025

   Symptoms

   On 5 December, during the cleanup after a zonal failover exercise in production, Honeycomb destroyed Kafka brokers on purpose as a runbook step, and several topic partitions lost every broker that held them and became fully leaderless. Any Honeycomb team or environment whose assigned partitions were all unavailable could no longer have its data ingested.

   Container crash loopData lossNode disk fullMonitoring outage

   Trigger

   During the cleanup that rebalances workloads after a successful zonal failover exercise, Honeycomb followed its runbook and destroyed Kafka brokers on purpose. Older, in-sync brokers were killed by accident, so some topic partitions lost every broker that held them.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   Message broker

   Contributing factor

   No safeguard on destructive changeUnrepresentative stagingSignal buried in noiseHarmful manual action

   Detection

   Responders noticed through the alerting noise that the ingest service Shepherd had gone into a crash loop more than an hour earlier. On Saturday morning they saw that the Kafka balancing jobs were not progressing and disk usage had not improved, and once the metadata topics were repaired, SLO processing triggers fired about ~18h of late data.

   Remediation

   • Marked the impacted partitions read-only on the producer side, which stopped Shepherd's crash loop
   • Ran partition reassignments to bring customers back to normal
   • Turned off the Kafka autobalancer and left a manual reassignment plan running overnight
   • Reduced local retention on Kafka to rely on S3 tiered storage for longer retention
   • Repaired the broken _confluent-tier-state and __consumer_offsets partitions, which unblocked SLO processing
   • Turned off ingest to stop the brokers from running out of disk
   • Turned off tiered storage, which freed the broker disk space at once
   • Reopened ingest, which ended the customer impact
   • Truncated the fully damaged Retriever partitions and left them read-only
   • Extended the binlog retention of the MySQL read-only replica because Activity Log could not publish to Kafka
   • Patched Retriever so its nodes could idle live and serve old data despite broken offsets
   • Made a one-time offset reset work in Retriever
   • Evacuated to a new Kafka cluster with new topics and partitions
   • Booted an Activity Log database instance from 9 December and replicated from it to limit data loss
   • Cleaned up the older Kafka clusters

   Action items

   • Consolidate internal documentation better as the company grows

   Lessons

   Many elements of this outage were already known: similar outages, workaround plans, RFCs, migrations and procedures for running such exercises safely existed, but the documents were unknown outside their authors or hard to find. Flexible, locally controlled work is easy to defer again and again in favour of urgent work, and Honeycomb wants to notice when deferring becomes a reflex. Many key interventions came from people who no longer owned the components, which shows drift between team boundaries and the coupling inside the system. The pre-production clusters were too small to reproduce the flaw, and tests on a cluster closer to production would have made catching it much more likely. Coordination and public communication were also hard: senior engineers tended to take the lead automatically, and customers said the updates gave too much detail about minor beta features.

   View case
2. IL-0280 Kafka brokers in many New Relic cells ran out of disk, leaving US data collection and alerting unusable for hours

   New Relic2021

   Symptoms

   On 29 July 2021, data collection and alerting in New Relic's US region became unusable for many customers for several hours. It began with one unresponsive Kafka broker in a single cell of NRDB, New Relic's telemetry data platform, and over the following hours Kafka brokers in more and more cells failed as their disks filled up.

   Node disk fullThroughput degradationMonitoring outage

   Trigger

   Responders used an incident response tool to extend Kafka data retention for the degraded cell so that its backlog would not be lost. The retention increase was larger than usual, and the tool applied it to all cells of the same type, not only the affected one.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   Message broker

   Contributing factor

   Harmful manual actionNo staged rolloutSignal buried in noiseUnverified assumption

   Detection

   Engineers saw a Kafka broker in one cell become unresponsive on the morning of 29 July. Later a monitoring alert warned that disk space was running low, but it fired together with unrelated warnings from several other systems and was missed.

   Remediation

   • Restarted the unresponsive Kafka broker by hand, while the automated restart was also running
   • Resolved the disk space problem on the Kafka brokers, after which service recovered slowly

   Lessons

   Cell isolation is the strongest protection against a widespread disruption, and emergency tools have to respect it just as normal operations do. Emergency response tools must be safe to use in chaotic situations without losing their ability to work. Engineers' attention is limited, so incident response processes and alerts need regular review to direct it at the most important signal.

   View case
3. IL-0211 A Mandrill PostgreSQL shard shut down at transaction ID wraparound and email sending was impaired for about 40 hours

   Mailchimp2019

   Symptoms

   From 05:35 UTC on 4 February 2019 Mandrill, Mailchimp's transactional email service, sent only 80% of queued emails, because one of its PostgreSQL shards, shard4, stopped accepting writes. When Mandrill engineers opened an investigation at 11:58 UTC, they saw a sharply elevated load on shard4.

   Writes rejectedThroughput degradationLoad imbalanceNode disk full

   Trigger

   At 05:35 UTC on 4 February the transaction ID counter of shard4, the busiest Mandrill PostgreSQL shard, reached its upper limit and PostgreSQL shut the database down to protect against wraparound.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   DatabasePostgreSQL vacuum

   Contributing factor

   Ignored early signalNo alert on limitSignal buried in noiseRetry stormMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   The first exception was logged overnight but was buried by unrelated exceptions in the centralized error reporting. Mandrill engineers opened an investigation at 11:58 UTC and, while looking for the source of the rising load on shard4, found the wraparound at 12:56 UTC.

   Remediation

   • Put shard4 into standalone mode and started VACUUM at 14:16 UTC on 4 February
   • Stopped and restarted the vacuum with settings that made it run faster
   • Started a dump and restore of the database without the Search and Url tables while the vacuum ran
   • Replaced storage volumes on the Mandrill app servers whose disks were filling with queued jobs and logs
   • Moved the job-queue tables from shard4 to other live shards
   • Truncated the Search and Url tables on the locked database at 19:12 UTC on 5 February, after which the vacuum finished in about an hour
   • Started sending from the backlog at 21:36 UTC
   • Added alerting for XID wraparound by 22:40 UTC

   Lessons

   Mailchimp named the factors that slowed its response: knowledge of and access to Mandrill systems and monitoring rested with a few people, Mandrill logging needed a locally writable disk, logs of malformed API requests were hard to separate from real application errors, job health was hard to see, and the disk space problem made partial deployments for triage risky. What helped was trained incident commanders with clear roles (incident commanders in 3-hour rotations, scribes, technical liaisons and points of contact between teams), periodic summaries with a list of recent and open decisions, and taking time in a video meeting to reassess, which led to the truncation. Running in the cloud let the team expand storage quickly, and the team was lucky that the largest table holding up the vacuum held data it could delete.

   View case

By root cause2