Cases4 cases

1 to 4 of 4

1. IL-0200 Newly provisioned Kubernetes nodes ran an incompatible etcd version and broke cluster consensus in several GitHub production clusters, causing 5XX errors on Git operations and page loads

   GitHub2026

   Symptoms

   From 01:36 UTC on 12 March 2026, GitHub.com returned elevated error rates for Git operations, web requests and related services. At 01:54 UTC the GitHub status page said it was investigating reports of impacted performance for some services.

   High error rate

   Trigger

   During a planned infrastructure upgrade, a configuration issue made newly provisioned Kubernetes nodes run an incompatible version of etcd.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   etcd

   Contributing factor

   Monitoring blind spot

   Detection

   The status page opened the incident at 01:54 UTC, 18 minutes after errors began, citing reports of impacted performance.

   Remediation

   • paused deployments for the duration of the incident
   • identified the newly provisioned nodes running the incompatible etcd version and removed them, which restored cluster consensus
   • ran a validation deploy that confirmed all systems were healthy before resuming normal operations

   Action items

   • Enforce version compatibility programmatically during node replacements
   • Add monitoring that detects split-brain conditions earlier
   • Update the recovery tooling to reduce restoration time

   View case
2. IL-0005 A new telemetry service overloaded the Kubernetes API servers of large clusters and broke DNS-based service discovery for all OpenAI services

   OpenAI2024

   Symptoms

   Alerts fired at 3:13 PM PST on 11 December 2024, and from 3:16 PM every OpenAI service was significantly degraded or completely unavailable, including ChatGPT, the API and Sora. The status page reported API calls returning errors and difficulties logging in to platform.openai.com and ChatGPT. Customer impact peaked at 3:40 PM.

   Service outageHigh error rateControl plane unresponsiveDNS resolution failures

   Trigger

   At 2:23 PM PST a change introducing a new telemetry service, which collects detailed Kubernetes control plane metrics, was merged and the deployment pipeline started. Between 2:51 PM and 3:20 PM the change was applied to all clusters.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Kubernetes API serverClient-side DNS resolver and cacheTelemetry agent

   Contributing factor

   Unrepresentative stagingNo staged rolloutCache-masked failureMonitoring blind spotLimited debug access

   Detection

   OpenAI's detection tools worked: alerts fired at 3:13 PM PST, a few minutes before customer impact began at 3:16 PM, and the root cause was identified at 3:16 PM.

   Remediation

   • Scaled clusters down to reduce the total Kubernetes API load
   • Blocked network access to the Kubernetes admin APIs so no new expensive requests arrived
   • Scaled up the Kubernetes API servers
   • Removed the telemetry service once enough control was back
   • Moved traffic from impacted clusters to healthy ones
   • Intervened manually in clusters where simultaneous resource downloads saturated resource limits

   Action items

   • Put every infrastructure configuration change through a phased rollout with continuous monitoring of both the service workloads and the clusters, including the Kubernetes control plane
   • Run fault injection tests in which the data plane runs without the control plane for longer, and tests that roll out bad changes on purpose to check detection and rollback
   • Build break-glass mechanisms so engineers can reach the Kubernetes API servers in any circumstances
   • Decouple the Kubernetes data plane from the control plane so that service discovery for critical workloads does not depend on the control plane
   • Speed up recovery with better caching and dynamic rate limiters for resources needed at cluster startup, and regular drills that rapidly replace an entire cluster

   Lessons

   Several systems and processes failed at once and interacted in unexpected ways: tests did not catch the change's effect on the Kubernetes control plane, DNS caching put a delay between the change and the failures, and being locked out of the control plane made remediation very slow. Because service discovery used Kubernetes DNS, the control plane was carrying load for product traffic even though the data plane was meant to be independent of it.

   View case
3. IL-0009 A duplicated generated name made Argo CD replace the InfluxDB Cloud production Application and delete the whole production environment

   InfluxData2022

   Symptoms

   Right after a pull request to the infrastructure-as-code repository was merged, every API endpoint of one InfluxDB Cloud production cluster began returning 404 errors. Writes and reads failed alike: no one could collect data, scheduled tasks failed to run and external queries did not work.

   Service outageResources deletedHigh error rate

   Trigger

   A merged pull request whose rendered YAML added a new Argo CD Application and AppProject that an automation error had named app01-cluster01, the name of the existing production Application, instead of app02-cluster01; reviewers did not notice the app01 and app02 difference.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Argo CDPersistent volumes and stateful setsConfiguration templating

   Contributing factor

   Missed in reviewNo runbookNo safeguard on destructive changeMonitoring blind spotAutomation amplification

   Detection

   Monitoring and alerting did not detect the issue right away, so the team's first response was to try to roll the change back rather than plan a recovery. The write-up does not say how the team found out.

   Remediation

   • stopped the revert of the merged pull request
   • restored the etcd metadata cluster
   • recreated the missing Kubernetes objects so the retained PersistentVolumes became available, then recreated the StatefulSets
   • restored the Zookeeper volumes from an hourly Velero backup
   • rebuilt the Kafka StatefulSet one pod at a time with health and readiness checks disabled
   • accepted writes into the Kafka write-ahead log and scaled up the write path with more replicas and higher memory requests and limits
   • recreated the storage pods, which downloaded data from object storage, reindexed it and replayed the write-ahead log
   • re-enabled Argo CD, queries, dashboards and scheduled tasks, restored replica counts and ran final QA checks

   Action items

   • Write runbooks for restoring state when Kubernetes objects such as PersistentVolumeClaims are deleted but the data on the underlying volumes is preserved
   • Set every volume in every environment to retain data when its PersistentVolumeClaim is deleted
   • Improve the process for handling public-facing incidents
   • Store generated YAML as one object per file, so an overwrite of an existing object shows up as such in review
   • Detect duplicate objects when generating YAML and warn before review, treating objects with the same group, namespace and name as the same even when the apiVersion string differs
   • Add the Argo CD Prune=false annotation to all stateful resources and to Namespace objects managed by Argo CD
   • Set FailOnSharedResource=true on Argo CD Applications so Argo CD fails before changing an object another Application manages or managed

   Lessons

   The biggest gap was that monitoring did not notice the deletion quickly, which pushed the team toward a reflex rollback; in a stateful system a revert can create a new, empty instance instead of bringing the old one back. Retained volumes and clients that retry writes are what kept data loss at zero. Rendering many objects into one file let an overwrite of an existing object look like an addition, so generated configuration needs one object per file and duplicate detection that compares objects the way Kubernetes does. Stateful resources need protection from pruning, and that protection must cover their Namespace too, or deleting the namespace removes everything inside it.

   View case
4. IL-0035 Worker nodes went NotReady after a new ElastAlert rule without memory limits used up node memory

   NU.nl2019

   Symptoms

   The NU.nl development team got reports that several services on one of its Kubernetes clusters behaved erratically: occasional error pages, slow responses and timeouts. The affected services were mostly internal tools and dashboards.

   Node NotReadyHigh error rateHigh latencyIntermittent timeoutsMonitoring outageOOMKilled

   Trigger

   A new ElastAlert rule, deployed shortly before from the command line, that fired if the Cloudfront-* Elasticsearch indexes stopped receiving documents; those indexes take a few million requests per hour, and the rule made ElastAlert's memory grow without bound.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Container memory limitkubeletPrometheus

   Contributing factor

   No resource requests or limitsUnreviewed defaultsNo alert on limitMonitoring blind spotExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Users reported error pages, slow responses and timeouts from several services; no alert fired.

   Remediation

   • terminated the NotReady nodes one by one so the auto-scaling group replaced them (the new nodes also went NotReady, but Prometheus and Grafana landed on a stable node)
   • found the ElastAlert pods' memory growth on the Grafana pod memory dashboard
   • fixed the ElastAlert problem that caused the memory growth

   Action items

   • Define alerts on resource usage such as CPU, memory and disk space
   • Keep researching an alerting strategy that combines Elasticsearch, Prometheus Alertmanager and New Relic
   • Consider exporting metrics out of the cluster and running Grafana outside it, on EC2 or a separate Kubernetes cluster
   • Either visualise the important metrics in the ELK stack or make Prometheus and Grafana more available, and improve the metrics strategy
   • Set resource limits for ElastAlert through the Helm values
   • Configure namespaces with default memory requests and limits
   • Isolate customer-facing workloads from build, logging and monitoring workloads (a dedicated node group, or later a separate tools cluster)
   • Deploy everything through automation such as Jenkins pipelines, and consider a GitOps approach
   • Deploy through a pipeline that includes a smoke test step
   • Make Kubernetes and cloud infrastructure work part of the team's sprints, picked up by all team members while pairing with more experienced members, and hold workshops that go deep into specific topics

   Lessons

   Fixing the root cause covers only a small part of what an incident can teach; the chain of smaller failures around it is where most of the learning is. A pod without a memory limit can take whole nodes down, so limits need defaults at the namespace level. Monitoring that runs inside the cluster it watches goes blind with it. Changes installed by hand from the command line leave the rest of the team without a record of what changed.

   View case

By root cause1