Cases36 cases

14 to 18 of 36

1. IL-0182 Too few CoreDNS replicas on EKS were overloaded during traffic spikes, raising latency and cutting the network for task pods, and the over-provisioned, tightly spread CoreDNS pods added later blocked Karpenter consolidation

   이언철2024

   Symptoms

   When traffic changed sharply, CoreDNS came under heavy load, and the cluster saw network problems and a sudden rise in latency. The horizontal pod autoscaler then added pods, database connections surged, and the impact spread to the whole service.

   High latencyIntermittent connection failuresAutoscaler misbehaviour

   Trigger

   Sharp changes in traffic loaded the small number of CoreDNS pods beyond what they could handle.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   CoreDNSKarpenterHorizontal pod autoscalerPod scheduling and placement

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationHarmful manual action

   Remediation

   • Set up the Cluster Proportional Autoscaler for CoreDNS with nodesPerReplica and coresPerReplica chosen for the instance types in use
   • Spread CoreDNS with soft topologySpreadConstraints (ScheduleAnyway) instead of anti-affinity so Karpenter could consolidate nodes
   • Added alert thresholds on CoreDNS error rate, panics, request duration and request rate
   • Deployed NodeLocal DNSCache so each node answers DNS from a local cache and forwards misses to the main CoreDNS

   Lessons

   A fixed, small number of CoreDNS pods cannot follow a cluster whose nodes and pods change quickly with traffic, and the damage spreads: DNS latency triggers autoscaling, which in turn floods the database with connections. Simply adding many CoreDNS replicas created a different problem, because with tainted nodes and a maxSkew: 1 spread constraint the pods piled onto a few nodes and blocked Karpenter consolidation. Scaling CoreDNS in proportion to the cluster and putting a DNS cache on every node handled both.

   View case
2. IL-0202 A burst of queries and database writes exhausted connection pools and memory on Honeycomb's ingest hosts, and Kubernetes crash-loop back-off kept failed hosts offline so ingest capacity stayed too low to recover

   Honeycomb2023sev1

   Symptoms

   Standard alerting paged Honeycomb's on-call engineers about the performance and stability of event ingestion, and the automated load-shedding mechanisms tripped and sent further notifications. The status page described a higher than normal error rate and response time on the ingestion service.

   High error rateHigh latencyContainer crash loopService outageDatabase overload

   Trigger

   An abnormally large number of queries arrived from many separate connections within a few minutes.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Application databaseIn-memory cache

   Contributing factor

   Retry stormAutomation amplification

   Detection

   Standard alerting notified the on-call engineers about ingestion performance and stability, and the automated load-shedding mechanisms added notifications when they tripped. The first status post, about alerts on a higher than normal error rate and response time, went up at 18:28 PST (02:28 UTC), 13 minutes after the 02:15 UTC start.

   Remediation

   • Scaled the ingest fleet up manually and aggressively
   • Cut off most ingest for a few minutes so the ingest hosts could come back with enough capacity
   • Temporarily lowered the rate limits for the most aggressive traffic sources until their traffic subsided

   Action items

   • Keep the ingest fleet scaled up to prevent a repeat while longer-term fixes are worked on
   • Decide on the projects that will address these failure paths

   Lessons

   Load shedding and auto-scaling were in place, yet a burst that arrived faster than the cache could spread its writes still took the ingest hosts down. During recovery, Kubernetes' crash loop back-off worked against the operators: the hosts that had failed stayed offline while the fleet needed every host. Clients that retry whole OTel batches after a partial drop can multiply traffic many times over, so per-source rate limits were what finally stabilised ingest.

   View case
3. IL-0141 gke-metadata-server versions 0.4.272 to 0.4.280 flooded Cloud Logging with "Unable to sync sandbox" debug logs on GKE clusters with Workload Identity, using up logging quota and adding billable usage

   Google Cloud2023

   Symptoms

   Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) customers with Workload Identity enabled saw a high logging rate. Debug log lines containing the string "Unable to sync sandbox" were ingested into Cloud Logging, used up the Cloud Logging ingestion quota and, beyond the free monthly allotment, produced extra billable usage. Workload Identity is opt-in on GKE Standard and always enabled on GKE Autopilot.

   Log floodHigh latency

   Trigger

   GKE clusters ran gke-metadata-server versions 0.4.272 to 0.4.280, which contained an incorrect configuration that wrote "Unable to sync sandbox" debug logs at a high rate.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Credential broker for pods

   Contributing factor

   –

   Detection

   The first status update was posted at 13:32 US/Pacific on 2023-11-02, and the updates told customers how to check a cluster from the version annotation on the gke-metadata-server DaemonSet.

   Remediation

   • rolled out a fix across the GKE fleet so the excess logs were no longer ingested into Cloud Logging
   • offered GKE Rapid channel customers a control plane upgrade to 1.28.2-gke.1157000 or above, or 1.27.7-gke.1038000 or above, as a workaround

   View case
4. IL-0028 Temporal History service latency rose because its pods were CPU-throttled while CPU usage read below 60 percent

   Temporal2023

   Symptoms

   Request latency from the Temporal Server History service, the service that starts workflow executions and records their progress, was higher and less steady than it should be on a self-hosted Kubernetes deployment. The CPU dashboard showed the history pods using less than 60 percent of their CPU, yet the same pods were being throttled.

   CPU throttlingHigh latency

   Trigger

   Normal load on History pods that had a CPU limit of 2 cores on 8-core nodes, with the Go runtime's GOMAXPROCS left at its default of one per node core.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Container CPU limitLanguage runtime settingsPrometheus

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   A Prometheus query for CPU throttling showed the history pods throttled although their CPU usage read under 60 percent.

   Remediation

   • set the GOMAXPROCS environment variable to 2 to match the 2-core CPU limit

   Action items

   • Set GOMAXPROCS automatically from the Kubernetes CPU limit, from Temporal release 1.21.0

   Lessons

   A CPU usage graph averaged over 15 seconds or more can sit far below 100 percent while a container is being throttled, so throttling needs its own metric. A Go program in a container should have GOMAXPROCS matched to its CPU limit, or to its CPU request when it has no limit. The author recommends not using CPU limits at all.

   View case
5. IL-0083 Intermittent 5xx errors in a multi-tenant Kubernetes cluster came from internal DNS: the node-local dnsmasq hit its 150 concurrent query limit, did not cache cluster.local answers, and ndots search lookups flooded CoreDNS

   Adevinta2023

   Symptoms

   On a Friday afternoon a tenant of SCHIP, Adevinta's multi-tenant Kubernetes runtime, reported a spike of HTTP 5xx errors in some of its services. The drops in quality of service came back periodically through the following days, each one short, and were reported mostly around midnight.

   High error rateDNS resolution failuresHigh latency

   Root cause

   DNS or network fault

   Component

   CoreDNSClient-side DNS resolver and cacheTelemetry agent

   Contributing factor

   Unreviewed defaultsUnknown limitIgnored early signalUnverified assumption

   Detection

   A tenant reported a spike of HTTP 5xx errors in some of its services; the DNS Latency SLI had already been degraded for some time without being acted on.

   Remediation

   • raised the dnsmasq concurrent query limit from 150 to 1500
   • added a CoreDNS header block that sets the ra and aa flags and clears rd, so dnsmasq caches cluster.local answers
   • configured dnsmasq on each node to answer NXDOMAIN for unresolvable search-domain names instead of forwarding them to CoreDNS
   • changed the fluent-bit log router hostname to a fully qualified name
   • asked the affected tenants to use fully qualified names for internal calls

   Lessons

   The DNS Latency SLI had shown the problem long before anyone looked at it. An SLO only protects you when its SLIs are trusted and a drop is investigated. The investigation took a month partly because several on-call groups worked on it separately, without one place for observations and hypotheses, and sometimes chased hypotheses already discarded. Disprove one hypothesis before starting the next, and collect data the metrics system lacks: DNStop showed the garbage lookups that no dashboard did. With ndots:5, short service names multiply DNS traffic; a node-local cache only helps if it can cache the cluster DNS answers at all.

   View case

By root cause7