Incident Library
Applied filters Root causeSoftware defectComponentIngress controllerSymptomService outageClear allEvery case under the filters, with no sentence; newest first.
Suggested filters Search, and the values found in your words appear here.

Graph

  • Root cause
  • Component
  • Symptom
  • Contributing factor
  • Case

Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

  1. Symptoms

    At 08:00 UTC on 2021-09-06 every service in DFDS's Kubernetes cluster answered with 404. Investigation started five minutes later.

    Trigger

    The automated Kubernetes node rollover on 2021-09-06 restarted all the Traefik v2 pods, five days after a malformed IngressRoute manifest had been applied.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    All services returned 404 from 08:00 UTC and root cause investigation started at 08:05. Time to detection was 5 minutes.

    Remediation
    • changed the ALB health check path, which made the targets healthy but did not stop the 404s
    • rolled back by hand to Traefik v1 as the main ingress controller
    • deleted the malformed IngressRoute by hand and confirmed the Traefik v2 bug
    • applied the changes upstream
    Action items
    • Upgrade Traefik to v2.5, where the bug is fixed, and verify that it removes the bug
    • Change the Traefik v2 health check path to something more robust
    • Set up an external liveness probe on the ingress controller
    • Consider workload segmentation to limit the blast zone
    • Look into monitoring the Traefik v2 API for rapid changes
    • Look into smoke testing during and after node rollover
    Lessons

    A malformed IngressRoute did nothing visible for five days and then took down all ingress when every Traefik v2 pod had restarted during a node rollover. Because Traefik v2 failed gracefully, the first signals pointed at the ALB health checks instead of at Traefik. On incident handling, the team concluded that appointing an incident manager could have helped, that the war room meeting should be recorded and a log book kept, that people not involved should only make suggestions in writing, and that a short first round of sharing thoughts and gut feelings is useful.

  2. Symptoms

    A user reported that pods were starting up and then vanishing. When the cluster operators looked, kubectl get pods and kubectl get nodes returned two different sets of data that alternated back and forth, as if there were two opinions of the cluster's state.

    Trigger

    etcd write latency rose far above the healthy single-digit milliseconds; the speakers say trouble starts once the database sync time crosses double digits or several hundred milliseconds.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    A user reported pods starting up and vanishing.

    Remediation
    • restored service on a replacement cluster
    • freed persistent volumes from the old cluster one by one so they could bind in the new cluster
    • updated DNS records that pointed at the old cluster's load balancer names
    Action items
    • Make the Kubernetes API server request quorum reads from etcd
    Lessons

    etcd is extremely sensitive to write latency; once the database sync time crosses double digits of milliseconds, stale reads or badly degraded performance follow. Without quorum reads, a consistent store can still hand out stale data. Documentation for a fast-moving system changes, so read it again regularly. Moving workloads to a new cluster is hard when they hold persistent volumes or when DNS records point at generated load balancer names.

Check your cluster for this

These 2 cases involve Ingress controller and Cloud load balancer. kubegap audits a Kubernetes cluster for gaps like these, read-only, from Claude Code or Codex; its checks cite public reports like the ones in this library.

By root cause1