Cases11 cases

6 to 10 of 11

1. IL-0157 After a release, new nodes could not join Linode Kubernetes Engine clusters with IP ACL enabled, so autoscaling failed on about 20 to 25 clusters

   Linode2025

   Symptoms

   From about 01:00 UTC on 2025-03-05, Linode Kubernetes Engine (LKE) clusters with IP ACL enabled failed to autoscale: new nodes could not join the cluster, and some customers had service disruptions. About 20 to 25 clusters in several regions around the world were affected; the status page lists the US-IAD (Washington), US-ORD (Chicago), US-SEA (Seattle) and IN-MAA (Chennai) LKE components.

   Scale-up failureService outage

   Trigger

   Akamai deployed the latest LKE software release.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Cluster autoscaler

   Contributing factor

   –

   Detection

   Customers began having problems at about 01:00 UTC, and the first status post, at 06:49 UTC, said the team was investigating an LKE autoscaling problem when IP ACL is turned on.

   Remediation

   • restarted the gateway pods, which gave only short-term relief
   • rolled back the release on all affected clusters

   Action items

   • Continue investigating the root cause and take preventive actions

   Lessons

   The defect hit only clusters with IP ACL enabled, and it showed when the autoscaler tried to add nodes. Restarting the gateway pods did not hold; rolling back the release ended the incident.

   View case
2. IL-0024 Expensive cache-backed API calls and uncancelled database requests overloaded MongoDB and took the Hugging Face Hub down three times

   Hugging Face2024

   Symptoms

   At 08:45 CET on 22 April 2024 the Hugging Face Hub became unstable, and by 09:30 it was unresponsive. For most users the website was slow or could not be reached at all.

   Service outageHigh latencyDatabase overload

   Trigger

   Bursts of requests to revision endpoints that read heavily from the *_info_cache collections: a call to https://huggingface.co/api/datasets/lighteval/mmlu/revision/main rose sharply right before the first crash, and a call to https://huggingface.co/api/models/sentence-transformers/all-mpnet-base-v2/revision/main, a model with 300+ associated spaces, lined up with the crash at 21:30 on 23 April.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Application databaseModel hubCluster autoscaler

   Contributing factor

   No headroomRetry stormOverlapping failures

   Detection

   Instability started at 08:45 on 22 April and the Hub was unresponsive by 09:30; the team followed MongoDB Atlas metrics and a MongoDB support case. The root cause was found days later from a new graph of requests per URL.

   Remediation

   • Added a firewall rule blocking all requests with a Java/* user agent
   • Disabled the quicksearch feature on the Hub
   • Scaled the MongoDB Atlas cluster by hand from tier 2 to tier 3
   • Switched the Hub to maintenance mode with a 503 page through AWS WAF and blocked incoming traffic
   • Scaled all Hub pods down to 0 and brought them back
   • Set an aggressive rate limit
   • Added timeouts to requests and reworked database queries that were slow or returned large bodies

   Action items

   • Add timeouts to requests based on their usual completion time
   • Optimise requests that took too long or returned a large body, and rework poorly designed database queries
   • Remove old unused indexes from the database
   • Build new dashboards and monitoring metrics
   • Move the *_info_cache collections to Redis
   • Make it possible to abort any database request when the client aborts theirs

   Lessons

   Finding the root cause took two to three days: the existing charts did not show it, and a per-URL request breakdown did. Not cancelling database work when a client goes away turns a strained database into a thundering herd. A close inspection of the database exposed architectural flaws and bottlenecks, such as a collection with large unused indexes, and taught the team which metrics need closer watching to anticipate crashes. Unrelated failures happening at the same time added to the stress and made restoring service harder.

   View case
3. IL-0096 A GKE node pool pinned to the europe-west2-b zone could not scale for 6.5 hours because Google ran out of resources in that zone (ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED)

   2i2c2022

   Symptoms

   A user of the LIS JupyterHub reported a "backoff after failed scale-up" error, and user servers would not start. An engineer opened incident #36, "LIS hub cannot scale", at 5:40 AM Pacific on 14 November 2022.

   Scale-up failurePods PendingService outage

   Trigger

   At 10 AM UK time on 14 November 2022, the B zone of Google Cloud's europe-west2 region (London) ran out of resources to allocate. The LIS cluster's nodes were restricted to that zone.

   Root cause

   Cloud provider outage

   Component

   Node poolCluster autoscaler

   Contributing factor

   Single point of failurePages not delivered

   Detection

   A user reported the "backoff after failed scale-up" error; an engineer opened the incident at 5:40 AM Pacific, about three hours and forty minutes after the zone ran out of resources.

   Remediation

   • edited the node pool in the GCP console to allow node creation in the A and C zones of europe-west2, which were not exhausted

   Action items

   • Either restrict the node pool back to the B zone after the Black Friday event, or move the cluster and the NFS Filestore to the A zone (infrastructure issue #1944)
   • Investigate an enterprise plan that allows a regional NFS, at higher cost (infrastructure issue #1945)
   • Make sure PagerDuty notifications always get through to engineers (team-compass issue #574)

   Lessons

   A node pool pinned to one zone for storage performance cannot scale when the cloud provider runs out of capacity in that zone. The autoscaler's "backoff after failed scale-up" message usually points to quotas, and raising quotas does nothing here; the ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED error in the logs is what identifies a zone without capacity. The review found that one engineer wearing many hats (incident commander, comms and debugging), with pages not reaching the other responders, made the response harder; a team response would have given more support.

   View case
4. IL-0205 The GKE cluster autoscaler could not add nodes to GitLab.com's production cluster because Google Cloud ran out of SSD persistent disks in us-east1

   GitLab2021

   Symptoms

   At 08:05 UTC on 2021-06-21 the API service's Apdex (the share of requests that finish within a target time) and Rails request queuing began trending the wrong way. At 09:01 the team found the API deployment unhealthy: it needed more pods for the day's growing traffic, but no new nodes could be added to give it pod capacity. Users saw slow responses; the review found no sign that error rates rose.

   Scale-up failureHigh latencyPods PendingDeploys failing

   Trigger

   Google Cloud ran out of SSD persistent disk stock in us-east1, the region GitLab.com runs in, while the API service needed more nodes for rising user traffic.

   Root cause

   Cloud provider outage

   Component

   Cluster autoscalerNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Monitoring blind spotLimited debug accessOverlapping failures

   Detection

   There was no alert on resource availability. Apdex and Rails queuing began trending the wrong way at 08:05 UTC and an engineer declared the incident in Slack at 08:43; finding the cause took a lot of log digging: cluster autoscaler errors about node pools in backoff, then ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED at the instance-group level, and finally Google Cloud support naming SSD as the exhausted resource.

   Remediation

   • added a node pool that uses pd-standard disks
   • scaled the new node pool by hand across all three zones to relieve the API
   • brought more pd-standard node pools online for the other blocked workloads
   • stopped production deployments and opened a Google Cloud support case about the cluster autoscaler not working with the new node pools
   • changed node pools and nodeSelectors so the remaining workloads ran on pd-standard nodes
   • removed the SSD-backed node pools after a day without problems

   Action items

   • Move Kubernetes services to pd-standard disks (delivery#1837)
   • Capture resource exhaustion errors as a metric

   Lessons

   A cloud region can run out of one specific resource, here SSD persistent disks, and the only error may be a generic ZONE_RESOURCE_POOL_EXHAUSTED that does not name it. GitLab could neither monitor nor reserve resource availability, so detection took 22 hours and the cause came from Google Cloud support. The workloads ran fine on pd-standard disks. A second problem found on the way, a cluster autoscaler that does not fall back to another matching node pool when one cannot scale, slowed the move to the new node pools.

   View case
5. IL-0015 A GKE cluster's /16 pod address range ran out at 256 nodes, leaving new pods Pending and node scale-ups failing

   loveholidays2020

   Symptoms

   A colleague wrote in Slack that his application was taking a long time to deploy. A deployment that normally finishes in minutes had been running for about an hour: about half of the new pods were running and serving traffic, and the other half were Pending.

   Pods PendingIP address exhaustionScale-up failure

   Trigger

   The cluster reaching 256 nodes, the most its /16 pod secondary range could hold at 256 addresses per node; every further node creation failed.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   VPC subnet or pod address rangeCluster autoscalerNode pool

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsUnknown limit

   Detection

   A colleague reported in Slack that a deployment was slow; the pending pods' events and the cluster autoscaler status ConfigMap showed the exhausted IP space.

   Remediation

   • lowered the maximum pods per node on selected node pools, cutting IP consumption by about 30%
   • moved some node pools to larger instance types

   Action items

   • Lower the maximum pods per node on node pools that do not run many pods
   • Use larger instance types in some node pools

   Lessons

   In a VPC-native GKE cluster the number of nodes, not the number of pods, uses up the pod range: by default each node reserves 256 addresses, so even a /16 is full at 256 nodes. Maximum pods per node and node size are the practical levers; larger nodes pack better but take more pods down when they fail.

   View case

By root cause6