Cases4 cases

1 to 4 of 4

1. IL-0471 GitHub Actions runs failed or sat queued for 9 hours after a routine deployment's pod replacement saturated capacity

   GitHub2026

   Symptoms

   From 15:05 UTC on 6 August 2026 GitHub Actions workflow runs failed to start, failed partway through or stayed queued for a long time, on both GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runners. Some requests to the Actions REST API returned errors, and some customers saw unexpected rate limiting in their workflows.

   High error rateHigh latency

   Trigger

   A routine deployment to an internal Actions service that processes events and generates Actions jobs replaced pods, and the remaining capacity became saturated.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   CI system

   Contributing factor

   No headroomExcessive blast radiusHarmful manual action

   Remediation

   • Expanded capacity of the affected services
   • Throttled incoming webhook-triggered work
   • Increased processing capacity for the backlog of affected events
   • Deployed changes that stopped runners from repeatedly trying to acquire invalid jobs
   • Deployed a fix for self-hosted runners that were not picking up jobs and enabled it incrementally
   • Paused migrations with GitHub Enterprise Importer
   • Restored webhook-triggered Actions workflows to full throughput
   • Rolled back the mitigation that left some ARC runners offline, and recovered those runners by hand
   • Shared CLI and UI steps for customers to clear jobs that could not be retried or canceled

   Action items

   • Improve deployment and capacity safeguards for the affected services
   • Strengthen monitoring for the conditions that preceded the incident
   • Improve the resiliency and recovery of queued work and runner assignment
   • Add automatic recovery for self-hosted runners in upcoming Runner and ARC releases
   • Reduce the risk of cascading failures and speed up recovery during large Actions disruptions

   View case
2. IL-0063 VPN outage after recreating a Redis StatefulSet restarted the whole Redis cluster without readiness checks

   AdGuard VPN2025

   Symptoms

   The day began with an alert that several instances of the Redis cluster were running out of disk space. That part was fixed quickly. The outage came an hour later: right after the Redis StatefulSet was deleted and recreated at 8:10 UTC, Kubernetes restarted every Redis pod within about five minutes, and problems started to appear.

   Service outageOOMKilledProbe failuresHigh latency

   Trigger

   To make Git match the volumes that had been resized by hand, the Redis StatefulSet was deleted with orphan (non-cascading) deletion and recreated with the new storage template; Kubernetes reconciled the new spec by restarting the entire Redis cluster.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Persistent volumes and stateful setsIn-memory cacheContainer memory limit

   Contributing factor

   No health probesUnverified assumptionSingle point of failureRetry stormNo headroom

   Detection

   An alert about Redis instances running out of disk space started the work; the outage itself showed up as backend errors about Redis connections right after the StatefulSet was recreated.

   Remediation

   • made the Redis masters forget obsolete node identities, reset the affected replicas and rejoined them, then waited for replication to catch up
   • identified the component that was actually running out of memory, scaled the backend service and raised memory limits for that component
   • temporarily relaxed probes so backend instances took traffic immediately instead of flapping between ready and not ready
   • reverted the temporary workarounds at 10:00 UTC

   Action items

   • Add startup probes so a Redis pod is not marked ready until its dataset is loaded
   • Build an own control plane for Redis that handles restarted pods stuck to an old master address
   • Reduce dependence on the single Redis cluster: move some important data to other stores, such as a separate Redis cluster per server, and use Kafka for some backend components

   Lessons

   The disk resize was not the problem; the cleanup afterwards was. An immutable field pushes operators toward deleting and recreating the controller, and that can set off a full reconcile. Startup and readiness probes are what slow a rolling restart down to a safe pace; without them a distributed store restarts in the most fragile way. Recovery plans must expect a cluster to heal slowly, and dependent services need to degrade gracefully while it does.

   View case
3. IL-0084 Packet drops on a bare metal provider's vSwitch forced Namespace to rebuild its fra3 region and left global capacity short, and the next day slow NVMe writes on a control plane node drove the Kubernetes API server to very high CPU

   Namespace2024

   Symptoms

   From 17 October 2024, packets through the vSwitch that joined Namespace's bare metal machines at one provider in the fra3 region were dropped at random. Retries in TCP, QUIC and the Namespace control plane hid most of it, but the SLO error budget for latency targets on key interactions began to burn.

   Intermittent connection failuresHigh latencyControl plane lagService outage

   Trigger

   Random packet drops on the bare metal provider's vSwitch from 17 October 2024; for the second outage, a rate of Kubernetes changes that the slow NVMe on one control plane node could no longer keep up with.

   Root cause

   Cloud provider outage

   Component

   Kubernetes API server

   Contributing factor

   No capacity planningNo headroomOverlapping failures

   Detection

   SLO-based monitoring of latency targets showed the error budget burning while retries hid the individual packet drops.

   Remediation

   • diverted all customer traffic from fra3 to other regions
   • connected each provider machine to the zrh1 cluster over Wireguard instead of the vSwitch
   • repaved every fra3 machine with a new identity, certificates and encryption-at-rest keys, dropping regional caches to recover faster
   • cloned existing datasets in a more distributed way to speed up repaving the machines
   • added machines back to the new region in batches and returned the region to the compute pool
   • redirected workloads away from zrh1 during the second outage
   • cloned the failing control plane node's key state to a higher-capacity node that took over its role and IP address

   Action items

   • Credit all instances that ran during the outages back to customers
   • Build up backup regions and solutions so a similar event has options that do not affect customers

   Lessons

   Running hot with a delayed hardware delivery left no room to take a region out, so fixing a provider network fault turned into a global capacity shortage. After one outage the team was anchored on its cause and first looked for network problems in the second outage, which had a different cause: a control plane node whose disk could not keep up with the Kubernetes change rate.

   View case
4. IL-0495 HubSpot's internal load balancers on Kubernetes were falsely marked unhealthy and the rest collapsed under the traffic

   HubSpot2024

   Symptoms

   Between 14:20 and 15:16 UTC on 27 August 2024, some HubSpot customers could not log in to their accounts, reach their content or use HubSpot tools. Requests were slow or failed because HubSpot's internal load balancers, which run on Kubernetes and spread traffic across the backend services, were overloaded.

   Probe failuresHigh latencyHigh error rate

   Trigger

   Routine operation of a critical component of HubSpot's traffic management system, from about 14:08 UTC, ran path handling updates in the load balancer stack, and an issue in that stack made those updates block health check responses.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerLiveness and readiness probes

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationNo headroom

   Detection

   Monitoring detected widespread performance degradation across the platform at 14:23 UTC and the incident response team was mobilised. HubSpot says it had identified the issue internally by 14:20 UTC. The status page was not updated until 14:44 UTC, which left customers with outdated information.

   Remediation

   • Tried to increase the capacity of the remaining load balancer instances
   • Brought new load balancer instances online, which relieved the pressure and let traffic return to normal

   Action items

   • Change the health check configuration so health checks do not time out falsely
   • Redesign the health check system so health checks get priority and keep running during operations such as configuration updates
   • Increase the capacity of the load balancers for sudden traffic spikes
   • Change the load balancing architecture to detect traffic surges earlier and distribute load dynamically in real time
   • Update the status page automatically for large-scale outages
   • Integrate the monitoring systems more tightly with the communication tools
   • Expand load testing to simulate high-traffic scenarios
   • Introduce chaos engineering to test platform resilience regularly
   • Add traffic pattern metrics, including the ratio of current connections to the maximum allowed
   • Add auto-scaling that adjusts resource capacity to traffic patterns

   Lessons

   HubSpot concluded that earlier detection of the abnormal traffic surge could have prevented the cascading failure, and that health checks have to keep running during operations such as configuration updates so that working load balancers are not removed together. The late status page update caused confusion for customers.

   View case

By root cause4