Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

1. IL-0020 During an EKS 1.30 upgrade the descheduler tried to reschedule every pod on the cordoned nodes at once and production workloads went down

   UK Ministry of Justice2025

   Symptoms

   At 09:36 on 18 March 2025, during the upgrade of the live cluster to EKS 1.30, users reported that their pods were being terminated and were not restarting automatically, in both production and non-production environments. Automated infrastructure alerts fired as well, and production services had outages.

   Pod evictionPods PendingService outageUpgrade stall

   Trigger

   Upgrading the live EKS cluster from 1.29 to 1.30, during which the descheduler attempted to reschedule all pods on the cordoned nodes simultaneously.

   Root cause

   Faulty deployment

   Component

   DeschedulerNode poolCluster autoscaler

   Contributing factor

   No headroomNo alert on limitUnreviewed defaults

   Detection

   Users reported at 09:36 that pods were being terminated and not restarting, and automated infrastructure alerts fired.

   Remediation

   • Removed the cordon annotation so pods could be rescheduled
   • Deleted stuck 1.30 nodes to force their recreation
   • Added a new node group of 20 nodes running 1.30 by hand
   • Cordoned and drained all old 1.29 nodes onto the new 1.30 nodes

   Action items

   • Raise an AWS Production System Down support case (Case ID: 174229643100496)
   • Get guidance from AWS support on querying control-plane logs to find the root cause of similar issues
   • Document a runbook for emergency scaling of a new node group in case of unexpected capacity shortages
   • Alert on an imbalance between the autoscaling group and the Kubernetes nodes
   • Review the descheduler configuration to understand why it throws pods off cordoned nodes, and fix it where possible
   • Alert on spikes in the pending pod count

   Lessons

   The write-up lists review actions rather than lessons. They show the team had no documented way to add an emergency node group, no alert on a mismatch between the autoscaling group and the nodes Kubernetes sees, no alert on a spike in pending pods, and no clear understanding of how the descheduler treats cordoned nodes.

   View case
2. 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 cause2