Cases43 cases

6 to 10 of 43

1. IL-0137 Training initialisation on a 60-node NVIDIA B200 cluster took more than 8 hours instead of minutes because fragmented small random I/O from all nodes saturated the metadata service of the VAST Data NFS storage

   Lablup Inc2026

   Symptoms

   The 60-node NVIDIA B200 training configuration for the Solar Open pre-training run showed no major problem during initial validation on 2 to 4 nodes. Once the job ran at its full size of 60 nodes, training initialisation, which reads from the VAST Data storage and should have finished within minutes, took more than 8 hours, and storage throughput stayed far below the theoretical limit.

   Throughput degradation

   Trigger

   Scaling the training job from 2 to 4 nodes in validation to the full 60-node configuration.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Shared network filesystem

   Contributing factor

   Unrepresentative stagingMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   The problem showed up as training initialisation taking hours after the job was scaled to 60 nodes; application logs showed only the delayed initialisation.

   Remediation

   • Sharded the Arrow training data files by rank on the application side
   • Switched the storage to asynchronous deletion instead of synchronous rm/unlink
   • Tuned readahead

   Lessons

   Storage behaviour measured on 2 to 4 nodes did not predict behaviour on 60 nodes: a metadata bottleneck of this kind appears only at production scale, so small pre-tests cannot find it. Per-node network rates can look normal while the combined access pattern of all nodes overwhelms the storage metadata path. Finding the cause took metrics from the application, scheduler, network and storage on one shared timeline; monitoring by any single team was not enough. The report concludes that GPU capacity has to be provisioned together with a matching storage path.

   View case
2. 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
3. IL-0124 Capacity changes queued while a circuit breaker was engaged ran all at once when it was released, taking multiple OpenAI inference engines out of service and raising API error rates

   OpenAI2026

   Symptoms

   Between about 4:26 PM and 4:56 PM PST on 4 March 2026, some OpenAI API requests to several models failed or took longer than usual, and some Codex traffic was affected too. The overall API success rate dropped temporarily.

   High error rateHigh latency

   Trigger

   A protective circuit breaker that had paused some scheduling operations was released, and the infrastructure actions queued during the pause were executed at the same time.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Automated capacity manager

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationChange with a delayed effectNo safeguard on destructive changeMonitoring blind spot

   Remediation

   • manually reassigned infrastructure resources to the affected models
   • brought the removed inference engines back online and reassigned them until error rates returned to normal

   Action items

   • Improve safeguards in the automated capacity management systems so they detect and respond to state drift
   • Improve observability of circuit breakers and scheduling systems so their status and effects are easier to identify
   • Add safeguards so queued actions cannot run in large batches after long pauses
   • Improve monitoring and alerting around capacity reconciliation problems

   Lessons

   Pausing one automated system does not stop the systems that feed it. Changes queued during the pause reflect the state at the time they were queued, and releasing the queue all at once applies those stale decisions together. The fixes OpenAI names are detecting state drift, making circuit breaker status visible, and preventing large batches from executing after a long pause.

   View case
4. 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
5. 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

By root cause9