-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add annotations for fixing 502 status code #527
Conversation
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new Changes
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Tip CodeRabbit's docstrings feature is now available as part of our Early Access Program! Simply use the command 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml
(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml (2)
2-8
: Verify consistency with other ingress resources
These ingress annotations might need to be aligned with other services in the cluster for consistent behavior.
✅ Verification successful
Ingress annotations are consistent with other services
The verification shows that the ingress annotations in packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml
are consistent with similar configurations found in other services:
- The same set of annotations (
proxy-body-size: 100m
,proxy-buffer-size: 100m
,proxy-buffers-number: "4"
) is used inpackages/extra/ingress/templates/dashboard.yaml
- Similar timeout settings are used in other services (e.g., Kubeapps uses
proxy-read-timeout: "600"
) - Large body size configurations are common across services:
- Dashboard: 100m
- SeaweedFS: unlimited ("0")
- Bucket service: unlimited ("0")
The values align with common practices for web applications requiring file uploads and long-running connections.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for similar ingress configurations in the codebase
echo "Searching for other ingress configurations..."
rg -l "ingress:" .
echo "Checking for existing nginx ingress annotations..."
rg -B2 -A2 "nginx\.ingress\.kubernetes\.io"
Length of output: 15018
4-4
: Consider investigating root cause of timeouts
Setting proxy-read-timeout
to 600 seconds (10 minutes) is quite high and might be masking underlying performance issues. While this may fix the 502 errors, it could lead to poor user experience.
Let's check if there are any related timeout configurations in the codebase:
Consider:
- Investigating why operations are taking so long
- Adding monitoring to track request durations
- Implementing progressive loading or pagination if dealing with large datasets
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/client-max-body-size: 100m | ||
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-body-size: 100m | ||
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffer-size: 100m | ||
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffers-number: "4" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Review memory implications of buffer settings
The buffer configuration raises some concerns:
- Setting
proxy-buffer-size
to 100m seems excessive for a buffer size and could lead to high memory usage per connection - This combined with
proxy-buffers-number: "4"
means each connection could allocate up to 400MB of buffer space
Recommendations:
- Start with smaller buffer sizes (e.g., 8k-16k) and increase only if needed
- Consider using request/response streaming for large payloads
- Monitor memory usage after deployment
Suggested values:
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/client-max-body-size: 100m
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-body-size: 100m
-nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffer-size: 100m
+nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffer-size: 16k
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffers-number: "4"
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/client-max-body-size: 100m | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-body-size: 100m | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffer-size: 100m | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffers-number: "4" | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/client-max-body-size: 100m | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-body-size: 100m | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffer-size: 16k | |
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-buffers-number: "4" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml (2)
5-6
: Monitor resource usage with increased body size limitsThe 100MB limit for both client and proxy body size is reasonable, but ensure you:
- Monitor memory usage across multiple concurrent large requests
- Consider implementing client-side file size validation
- Add appropriate documentation for API consumers about size limits
2-8
: Implement comprehensive monitoring for ingress performanceWhile these annotations should help address 502 errors, consider implementing:
- Prometheus metrics for:
- Request duration
- Buffer utilization
- Connection counts
- Alerting for timeout events
- Gradual tuning based on actual usage patterns
- Documentation of these limits in your API documentation
This will help validate the effectiveness of these changes and identify potential optimizations.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml
(1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
packages/system/dashboard/values.yaml (2)
2-3
: LGTM: Proper configuration structure
The ingress configuration is correctly placed and follows standard Kubernetes annotation patterns.
7-8
: Improved buffer configuration
The buffer settings have been optimized following the previous review feedback:
- Buffer size reduced to 16k (from 100m)
- 4 buffers per connection is a reasonable default
@@ -1,4 +1,11 @@ | |||
kubeapps: | |||
ingress: | |||
annotations: | |||
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/proxy-read-timeout: "600" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💡 Codebase verification
Timeout configuration needs alignment across services
The codebase shows inconsistent timeout configurations that could lead to reliability issues:
- Default ingress-nginx has 10s timeout
- Dashboard and Kubeapps both use 600s (10 min)
- Bucket service uses 99999s (~27.7 hours)
Consider:
- Standardizing timeout values across services based on actual requirements
- Reducing the dashboard timeout from 600s to align closer with ingress-nginx defaults
- Particularly review the bucket service's excessive timeout of 99999s
🔗 Analysis chain
Consider a more conservative timeout value
While increasing the timeout can help prevent 502 errors, 600 seconds (10 minutes) is quite long and might mask underlying performance issues. Consider:
- Starting with a lower value (e.g., 120-180 seconds)
- Implementing proper monitoring to identify the root cause of long-running requests
- Gradually adjusting based on actual needs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any existing timeout-related configurations in other ingress resources
rg -A 2 "proxy-read-timeout" --type yaml
Length of output: 1319
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Summary by CodeRabbit