Cases52 cases

5 to 9 of 52

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-0181 A traffic spike from an external community post pushed product API pods into CPU throttling under a 1-core limit, and an e-commerce product page slowed down while every pod stayed Running

   Kevin2026

   Symptoms

   An e-commerce platform suddenly became slow to respond, worst on the product lookup page, and users began reporting that the page would not open.

   CPU throttlingHigh latency

   Trigger

   A post on the external community Ppomppu linked to the platform and brought a large number of users in a short time, who called the product lookup API heavily.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Container CPU limitHorizontal pod autoscaler

   Contributing factor

   Monitoring blind spot

   Detection

   Users reported that the product page would not open. The dashboard showed all pods Running, and the namespace CPU usage near 100% and the CPU usage metrics pointed to throttling.

   Remediation

   • raised the HPA minReplicas from 5 to 10
   • raised the container CPU limit from 1 core to 2 cores

   Action items

   • Keep adjusting the CPU limit to a suitable level through monitoring

   Lessons

   CPU throttling is hard to notice: pods stay Running, nothing restarts and the logs show no clear error, so a pod list does not reveal it and CPU usage metrics do. Settings that had handled expected event traffic became the bottleneck as soon as one external post multiplied the traffic. The author concludes that the team needs more preparation for traffic pattern changes and more thought about resource settings.

   View case
3. IL-0405 An expired AWS Load Balancer Controller webhook certificate left no healthy targets and took BSEE SaaS down

   PortSwigger2026

   Symptoms

   From 10:00 UTC on 11 January 2026 every BSEE SaaS instance in PortSwigger's US and Canada regions was unavailable: customers could not open the Web UI or start scans. The platform team learned of it only when customers reported it through support at 09:52 UTC the next day.

   Service outageTLS certificate errors

   Trigger

   The upgrade of the AWS Load Balancer Controller from v1.14.1 to v1.16.0 on 28 November 2025 left an orphaned webhook TLS secret that cert-manager could not renew, and the certificate in it expired on 8 January 2026.

   Root cause

   Breaking change in an upgrade

   Component

   Ingress controllerAdmission webhookcert-managerHelmConfigMaps and SecretsCloud load balancer

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effectMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   Customers reported the outage through support at 09:52 UTC on 12 January 2026, almost 24 hours after impact began, and the platform team began investigating at 10:00 UTC.

   Remediation

   • Deleted the orphaned aws-load-balancer-tls secrets in the US and Canada clusters
   • Redeployed the AWS Load Balancer Controller configuration with Helm
   • Verified that new certificates were generated and the webhooks worked again

   Action items

   • Audit all clusters for orphaned secrets that have no owning Certificate resource and resolve them
   • Add high-level application access alerting for each SaaS cluster from an external probe

   View case
4. IL-0188 Rolling updates on EKS returned 502 errors for about 30 seconds because Kubernetes deleted old pods as soon as new pods passed readiness, before the ALB had marked the new pod targets healthy

   Yonghyun Kim2025

   Symptoms

   Every rolling update of the team's microservices on Amazon EKS, behind an Application Load Balancer, was followed by intermittent 502 and 503 errors for users. A Slack message at 3 a.m. read "배포는 성공했는데, 서비스는 죽었다" (the deployment succeeded, but the service died). Every pod was Ready and Datadog was green while users saw errors.

   High error rateService outage

   Trigger

   A rolling update of a Deployment served through an ALB that registers pod IPs as targets, with no pod readiness gates.

   Root cause

   Faulty deployment

   Component

   Cloud load balancerIngress controllerPod termination

   Contributing factor

   Unverified assumptionUnreviewed defaultsMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   A Slack message at 3 a.m. reported that the deployment had succeeded but the service was down; Datadog dashboards were green at the time.

   Remediation

   • labelled the namespace with elbv2.k8s.aws/pod-readiness-gate-inject=enabled so the AWS Load Balancer Controller injects pod readiness gates and Kubernetes waits for the ALB target to be healthy before deleting old pods

   Lessons

   A pod being Ready in Kubernetes does not mean the load balancer will send it traffic. Without a readiness gate, a rolling update can delete the old pods while the ALB still considers the new targets unhealthy, and dashboards that track pod status stay green during the errors. Making pods wait longer on shutdown reduced the errors but did not fix the start-up gap and made every deployment much slower; the readiness gate ties the pod's Ready state to the ALB's view of the target.

   View case
5. IL-0581 29CM product display servers lost pods and saturated Netty event loops on the first day of the Igu Week sale

   MUSINSA2025

   Symptoms

   Shortly after 29CM's Igu Week sale began on 3 November 2025, the servers for the display domain, which serve search results and product listings, showed anomalies. Some pods went down and stopped taking traffic, and the remaining pods received more traffic than they could handle and saturated their Netty event loops.

   Probe failuresIntermittent connection failuresHigh latency

   Trigger

   Igu Week, 29CM's largest Black Friday sale and its busiest traffic of the year, raised Redis network traffic to about four times normal.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   In-memory cacheLiveness and readiness probes

   Contributing factor

   Unknown limitMonitoring blind spotHealth check tied to a dependency

   Detection

   Anomalies on the display servers, pods going down and Netty event loops saturating, were the first sign. The Redis cause was found from Redis health check failure logs and then the Redis network metrics.

   Remediation

   • Scaled the Redis nodes up from cache.r7g.large to cache.r7g.2xlarge, about twice the baseline network bandwidth

   Action items

   • Extended the monitoring dashboard to show in real time whether network in and out bandwidth exceeds the baseline, with metrics such as aws.elasticache.network_bandwidth_out_allowance_exceeded and aws.elasticache.traffic_management_active
   • Added Datadog alerts that fire when network bandwidth crosses a threshold
   • Added a Caffeine local cache in front of Redis for data that changes rarely
   • Look into compressing cached data with Snappy to reduce Redis network bandwidth
   • Look into storing cached data as Protocol Buffers instead of JSON; measured on the cached Item Document data, Snappy and protobuf together are expected to cut the size by about 73%
   • Keep improving the architecture for traffic growth, building on the cache restructuring, stronger monitoring and read separation already applied

   Lessons

   CPU and memory metrics alone did not show the problem, so Redis needs network monitoring against the node's bandwidth baseline. Burst credits kept the nodes working for about two hours after traffic passed the baseline, which delayed the failure and made its cause slower to find.

   View case

By root cause9