Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

1. IL-0322 A GCP storage incident degraded the disk under GitLab.com's primary PostgreSQL and caused two bursts of site-wide 503s

   GitLab2026sev1

   Symptoms

   On 2026-06-11 https://gitlab.com returned widespread, intermittent HTTP 503 errors across all major services in two bursts of about 5 to 10 minutes, 06:16 to 06:22 UTC and 07:03 to 07:12 UTC. A Pingdom alert reported the first burst in triage at 06:16:12, about four minutes after impact began at 06:12, and each burst ended on its own.

   Service outageIntermittent timeoutsConnection pool exhaustionLock contention or deadlockReplication lag

   Trigger

   A GCP storage incident degraded the IO of a disk in the `us-east1-b` zone that backed GitLab.com's primary PostgreSQL node.

   Root cause

   Cloud provider outage

   Component

   DatabaseCloud block storage

   Contributing factor

   Single point of failureNo alert on limitNo runbook

   Detection

   A Pingdom alert on the user-facing 503 errors was reported in triage at 06:16:12 UTC. No alert existed for disk IO saturation, pgBouncer pool saturation or LWLock contention.

   Remediation

   • Escalated to Database Operations experts
   • Paused deployments
   • Opened a GCP support case and engaged the GCP TAM, and GCP confirmed the storage incident
   • Prepared a Patroni primary switchover to node 04 in us-east1-d as a contingency, without executing it
   • Held a 3-hour pause-and-review window and resolved the incident after no recurrence

   Action items

   • Add disk IO saturation and queue-depth alerting for primary Patroni database nodes
   • Write a Patroni primary switchover runbook with explicit trigger thresholds
   • Clarify incident state-transition guidance for intermittent, self-resolving issues
   • Decide whether the primary should fail over automatically during disk IO degradation
   • Find a short-term mitigation that limits the blast radius of a single degraded disk until Cells do so
   • Make application database load balancing fail fast or reroute when the primary stops responding
   • Consider alerting on pgBouncer pool saturation and LWLock contention as leading indicators

   Lessons

   A single degraded disk was enough to take down GitLab.com because all primary database traffic goes through one node and requests waited for the Rack timeout instead of failing fast. The leading indicators, disk IO queue depth, pgBouncer pool saturation and LWLock contention, rose before full impact but had no alerts. Without decision criteria for a switchover, responders spent much of an intermittent incident waiting, and it was hard to decide when to move the incident to Fixing or Monitoring.

   View case
2. IL-0218 GitLab.com's primary PostgreSQL data was wiped by mistake and, with no working backup, the site was down about 18 hours

   GitLab2017

   Symptoms

   From around 19:00 UTC on 31 January 2017, load on GitLab.com's PostgreSQL database rose, which GitLab suspected was spam, and many users could not post comments on issues and merge requests. Around 23:00 UTC the replication of the PostgreSQL secondary fell behind and then failed, because WAL segments it still needed had already been removed from the primary.

   Database overloadReplication lagData lossService outage

   Trigger

   While trying to restore replication to the secondary, an engineer ran the removal of the PostgreSQL data directory on the primary, db1.cluster.gitlab.com, believing it was the secondary.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   DatabaseDatabase replicationDatabase backups and snapshotsCloud block storage

   Contributing factor

   Untested backupSingle point of failureNo runbookPages not deliveredUnverified assumptionUnreviewed defaults

   Detection

   The engineer who ran the deletion on the primary noticed the mistake and stopped it a second or two later.

   Remediation

   • Raised max_wal_senders from 3 to 32 and lowered max_connections from 8000 to 2000 so PostgreSQL would restart
   • Stopped the deletion on the primary a second or two after noticing it
   • Restored the database from the LVM snapshot taken about 6 hours before the outage by copying the PostgreSQL data directory from staging
   • Restored the webhooks from a separate database built from the snapshot and imported them as a SQL dump
   • Incremented all database sequences by 100,000 so IDs used before the outage could not be reused
   • Re-enabled GitLab.com gradually
   • Rebuilt projects created after 17:20 UTC in basic form from their Git repositories on the NFS cluster

   Action items

   • Change the shell prompt (PS1) on all hosts to show more clearly which host and environment is in use
   • Monitor backups with Prometheus
   • Set PostgreSQL's max_connections to a sane value
   • Investigate point-in-time recovery and continuous archiving for PostgreSQL
   • Take LVM snapshots of the production databases every hour
   • Take Azure disk snapshots of the production databases
   • Move staging to the ARM environment
   • Recover the production replicas
   • Test recovery of PostgreSQL database backups automatically
   • Improve the PostgreSQL replication documentation and runbooks
   • Investigate pgbarman for PostgreSQL backups
   • Investigate WAL-E for database backup and realtime replication
   • Build a streaming database restore
   • Assign an owner for data durability
   • Set up multiple secondaries and balance load among them with pgpool-II
   • Provide a tool for developers to run and revert Rails migrations on staging
   • Build owned recovery procedures for the rest of the GitLab.com infrastructure, not only the database
   • Publish a backup monitoring dashboard and add more backup data to it
   • Improve the abuse reporting and response system so removal for spam does not hard delete
   • Redact engineers' names in future public incident documents

   Lessons

   GitLab split the incident into two problems: GitLab.com went down because the primary's data directory was removed by mistake during a manual, undocumented replication rebuild, and recovery took over 18 hours because the backups had failed silently, disk snapshots were not enabled and the only copy sat on slow staging disks. The backup procedure was never tested because no one owned it. GitLab chose to focus on fast, regularly practised recovery and on making it obvious which host an engineer is on, rather than on blocking commands, since a safer rm only protects against one of many ways to lose data.

   View case

By root cause2