Has your browsing experience ever been disrupted by this error page? Sometimes Cloudflare returns “Error 500” when our servers cannot respond to your web request. This inability to respond could have several potential causes, including problems caused by a bug in one of the services that make up Cloudflare’s software stack.
We know that our testing platform will inevitably miss some software bugs, so we built guardrails to gradually and safely release new code before a feature reaches all users. Health Mediated Deployments (HMD) is Cloudflare’s data-driven solution to automating software updates across our global network. HMD works by querying Thanos, a system for storing and scaling Prometheus metrics. Prometheus collects detailed data about the performance of our services, and Thanos makes that data accessible across our distributed network. HMD uses these metrics to determine whether new code should continue to roll out, pause for further evaluation, or be automatically reverted to prevent widespread issues.
Cloudflare engineers configure signals from their service, such as alerting rules or Service Level Objectives (SLOs). For example, the following Service Level Indicator (SLI) checks the rate of HTTP 500 errors over 10 minutes returned from a service in our software stack.
sum(rate(http_request_count{code="500"}[10m])) / sum(rate(http_request_count[10m]))An SLO is a combination of an SLI and an objective threshold. For example, the service returns 500 errors <0.1% of the time.
If the success rate is unexpectedly decreasing where the new code is running, HMD reverts the change in order to stabilize the system, reacting before humans even know what Cloudflare service was broken. Below, HMD recognizes the degradation in signal in an early release stage and reverts the code back to the prior version to limit the blast radius.
Cloudflare’s network serves millions of requests per second across diverse geographies. How do we know that HMD will react quickly the next time we accidentally release code that contains a bug? HMD performs a testing strategy called backtesting, outside the release process, which uses historical incident data to test how long it would take to react to degrading signals in a future release.
We use Thanos to join thousands of small Prometheus deployments into a single unified query layer while keeping our monitoring reliable and cost-efficient. To backfill historical incident metric data that has fallen out of Prometheus’ retention period, we use our object storage solution, R2.
Today, we store 4.5 billion distinct time series for a year of retention, which results in roughly 8 petabytes of data in 17 million objects distributed all over the globe.
To give a sense of scale, we can estimate the impact of a batch of backtests:
-
Each backtest run is made up of multiple SLOs to evaluate a service’s health.
-
Each SLO is evaluated using multiple queries containing batches of data centers.
-
Each data center issues anywhere from tens to thousands of requests to R2.
Thus, in aggregate, a batch can translate to hundreds of thousands of PromQL queries and millions of requests to R2. Initially, batch runs would take about 30 hours to complete but through blood, sweat, and tears, we were able to cut this down to 2 hours.
Let’s review how we made this processing more efficient.
HMD slices our fleet of machines across multiple dimensions. For the purposes of this post, let’s refer to them as “tier” and “color”. Given a pair of tier and color, we would use the following PromQL expression to find the machines that make up this combination:
group by (instance, datacenter, tier, color) (
up{job="node_exporter"}
* on (datacenter) group_left(tier) datacenter_metadata{tier="tier3"}
* on (instance) group_left(color) server_metadata{color="green"}
unless on (instance) (machine_in_maintenance == 1)
unless on (datacenter) (datacenter_disabled == 1)
)Most of these series have a cardinality of approximately the number of machines in our fleet. That’s a substantial amount of data we need to fetch from object storage and transmit home for query evaluation, as well as a significant number of series we need to decode and join together.
Since this is a fairly common query that is issued in every HMD run, it makes sense to precompute it. In the Prometheus ecosystem, this is commonly done with recording rules:
hmd:release_scopes:info{tier="tier3", color="green"}Aside from looking much cleaner, this also reduces the load at query time significantly. Since all the joins involved can only have matches within a data center, it is well-defined to evaluate those rules directly in the Prometheus instances inside the data center itself.
Compared to the original query, the cardinality we need to deal with now scales with the size of the release scope instead of the size of the entire fleet.
This is significantly cheaper and also less likely to be affected by network issues along the way, which in turn reduces the amount that we need to retry the query, on average.
Distributed query processing
HMD and the Thanos Querier, depicted above, are stateless components that can run anywhere, with highly available deployments in North America and Europe. Let us quickly recap what happens when we evaluate the SLI expression from HMD in our introduction:
sum(rate(http_request_count{code="500"}[10m]))
/
sum(rate(http_request_count[10m]))Upon receiving this query from HMD, the Thanos Querier will start requesting raw time series data for the “http_requests_total” metric from its connected Thanos Sidecar and Thanos Store instances all over the world, wait for all the data to be transferred to it, decompress it, and finally compute its result:
While this works, it is not optimal for several reasons. We have to wait for raw data from thousands of data sources all over the world to arrive in one location before we can even start to decompress it, and then we are limited by all the data being processed by one instance. If we double the number of data centers, we also need to double the amount of memory we allocate for query evaluation.
Many SLIs come in the form of simple aggregations, typically to boil down some aspect of the service’s health to a number, such as the percentage of errors. As with the aforementioned recording rule, those aggregations are often distributive — we can evaluate them inside the data center and coalesce the sub-aggregations again to arrive at the same result.
To illustrate, if we had a recording rule per data center, we could rewrite our example like this:
sum(datacenter:http_request_count:rate10m{code="500"})
/
sum(datacenter:http_request_count:rate10m)This would solve our problems, because instead of requesting raw time series data for high-cardinality metrics, we would request pre-aggregated query results. Generally, these pre-aggregated results are an order of magnitude less data that needs to be sent over the network and processed into a final result.
However, recording rules come with a steep write-time cost in our architecture, evaluated frequently across thousands of Prometheus instances in production, just to speed up a less frequent ad-hoc batch process. Scaling recording rules alongside our growing set of service health SLIs quickly would be unsustainable. So we had to go back to the drawing board.
It would be great if we could evaluate data center-scoped queries remotely and coalesce their result back again — for arbitrary queries and at runtime. To illustrate, we would like to evaluate our example like this:
(sum(rate(http_requests_total{status="500", datacenter="dc1"}[10m])) + ...)
/
(sum(rate(http_requests_total{datacenter="dc1"}[10m])) + ...)This is exactly what Thanos’ distributed query engine is capable of doing. Instead of requesting raw time series data, we request data center scoped aggregates and only need to send those back home where they get coalesced back again into the full query result:
Note that we ensure all the expensive data paths are as short as possible by utilizing R2 location hints to specify the primary access region.
To measure the effectiveness of this approach, we used Cloudprober and wrote probes that evaluate the relatively cheap, but still global, query count(node_uname_info).
sum(thanos_cloudprober_latency:rate6h{component="thanos-central"})
/
sum(thanos_cloudprober_latency:rate6h{component="thanos-distributed"})In the graph below, the y-axis represents the speedup of the distributed execution deployment relative to the centralized deployment. On average, distributed execution responds 3–5 times faster to probes.
Anecdotally, even slightly more complex queries quickly time out or even crash our centralized deployment, but they still can be comfortably computed by the distributed one. For a slightly more expensive query like count(up) for about 17 million scrape jobs, we had difficulty getting the centralized querier to respond and had to scope it to a single region, which took about 42 seconds:
Meanwhile, our distributed queriers were able to return the full result in about 8 seconds:
HMD batch processing leads to spiky load patterns that are hard to provision for. In a perfect world, it would issue a steady and predictable stream of queries. At the same time, HMD batch queries have lower priority to us than the queries that on-call engineers issue to triage production problems. We tackle both of those problems by introducing an adaptive priority-based concurrency control mechanism. After reading Netflix’s work on adaptive concurrency limits, we implemented a similar proxy to dynamically limit batch request flow when Thanos SLOs start to degrade. For example, one such SLO is its cloudprober failure rate over the last minute:
sum(thanos_cloudprober_fail:rate1m)
/
(sum(thanos_cloudprober_success:rate1m) + sum(thanos_cloudprober_fail:rate1m))We apply jitter, a random delay, to smooth query spikes inside the proxy. Since batch processing prioritizes overall query throughput over individual query latency, jitter helps HMD send a burst of queries, while allowing Thanos to process queries gradually over several minutes. This reduces instantaneous load on Thanos, improving overall throughput, even if individual query latency increases. Meanwhile, HMD encounters fewer errors, minimizing retries and boosting batch efficiency.
Our solution simulates how TCP’s congestion control algorithm, additive increase/multiplicative decrease, works. When the proxy server receives a successful request from Thanos, it allows one more concurrent request through next time. If backpressure signals breach defined thresholds, the proxy limits the congestion window proportional to the failure rate.
As the failure rate increases past the “warn” threshold, approaching the “emergency” threshold, the proxy gets exponentially closer to allowing zero additional requests through the system. However, to prevent bad signals from halting all traffic, we cap the loss with a configured minimum request rate.
Because Thanos deals with Prometheus TSDB blocks that were never designed for being read over a slow medium like object storage, it does a lot of random I/O. Inspired by this excellent talk, we started storing our time series data in Parquet files, with some promising preliminary results. This project is still too early to draw any robust conclusions, but we wanted to share our implementation with the Prometheus community, so we are publishing our experimental object storage gateway as parquet-tsdb-poc on GitHub.
We built Health Mediated Deployments (HMD) to enable safe and reliable software releases while pushing the limits of our observability infrastructure. Along the way, we significantly improved Thanos’ ability to handle high-load queries, reducing batch runtimes by 15x.
But this is just the beginning. We’re excited to continue working with the observability, resiliency, and R2 teams to push our infrastructure to its limits — safely and at scale. As we explore new ways to enhance observability, one exciting frontier is optimizing time series storage for object storage.
We’re sharing this work with the community as an open-source proof of concept. If you’re interested in exploring Parquet-based time series storage and its potential for large-scale observability, check out the GitHub project linked above.