AWS Network Load Balancer - TCP target group unhealthy threshold - amazon-web-services

I have a question about health check configuration for a target group behind a network load balancer.
When I try to put different healthy/unhealthy thresholds I cannot change the unhealthy threshold and the infobox for this field specifies that must be the same than healthy threshold, but I'm not able to find any reason for this limitation.
Why is not possible to set different healthy / unhealthy thresholds?
I've seen a strange behaviour in autoscaling activities where all instances behind the target group were declared as unhealthy at the same time including one that have been added recently, taking the system out of service for a few minutes until scaling activity solve the problem.
Thanks in advance,

Related

Does an Application Load Balancer does automatic health check on an unhealthy instance?

We have a private EC2 Linux instance running behind an ALB. There is only one instance running and no auto-scaling configured.
Sometimes ALB marks the instance as unhealthy for some reasons. This mostly happens when network traffic is high on the instance, which generally one or two hours. This behavior is unpredictable. So when try to access the web application which is deployed in the EC2 instance, we get 502 bad gateway. We reboot the EC2 instance and only then the issue is resolved.
Does an ALB perform a health check on a target group again after it marks it as unhealthy? Suppose an ALB marks the target group with one EC2 instance as unhealthy. ALB is configured to perform a health check every 30 seconds. Will it check for healthiness after 30 seconds after it marked as unhealthy on the same target group? Or will it look for new healthy instance?
I assume auto-scaling configuration may resolve this problem by setting AS group with 1 when an instance go unhealthy? Our AWS architect feels the Tomcat is creating memory leak when too many requests come at a time.Tomcat does not run in the EC2.
What is the way to troubleshoot this problem? I search for system logs and configured ALB access logs, but no clue is available.
In this link I see ALB routes requests to the unhealthy targets when no other healths target is available .
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/latest/application/target-group-health-checks.html
My question is will ALB perform health check on the target group again after it marks it as unhealthy?
Indeed even when marked as unhealthy, the ALB continues the health checking. You can configure a 'healthy threshold count', which indicates how many 'healthy' responses should be received before an unhealthy host is marked as healthy again.
According to the docs:
When the health checks exceed HealthyThresholdCount consecutive successes, the load balancer puts the target back in service.
If your health check interval is 60 seconds, and the healthy threshold count is 3, it takes a minimum of 3 minutes before an unhealthy host will be marked healthy again.

AWS target groups turn unhealthy with no data

I have a backend server deployed on aws in a single EC2 instance via elastic beanstalk. The server has ip whitelisting and hence does not respond to ALB health checks, so all target groups always remain unhealthy.
According to the official AWS docs on health checks,
If a target group contains only unhealthy registered targets, the load balancer nodes route requests across its unhealthy targets.
This is what keeps my application running even though the ALB target groups are always unhealthy.
This changed last night and I faced an outage where all requests started getting rejected with 503s for reasons I'm not able to figure out. I was able to get things to work again by provisioning another EC2 instance by increasing minimum capacity of elastic beanstalk.
During the window of the outage, cloudwatch shows there is neither healthy nor unhealthy instances, though nothing actually changed as there was one EC2 instance running for past few months untouched.
In that gap, I can find metrics on TCP connections though:
I don't really understand what happened here, can someone explain what or how to debug this?

Configuring auto scaling with multiple target groups

Is it a good practice to setup 1 autoscaling with multiple target groups. All the target groups registered with same load balancer.
The scenario is Application load balancer LB1 listens on 80 and 443, has the target groups:
"open" Port is http/80
"secure". Port is https/443
If the auto scaling group has target tracking policy on average CPU utilisation, if "open" target group has higher CPU utilisation than "secure". Then there would be no auto scaling?
If alarm is breached how auto scaling group determine which target group should have the new instance?
Do I have to create separate auto scaling. group for each target group. I could not find any amazon docs for this scenario of multiple target group under 1 auto scaling group.
Please let me know
According to the AWS Documentation
If you attach multiple load balancer target groups or Classic Load Balancers to the group, all of them must report that the instance is healthy in order for it to consider the instance healthy. If any one of them reports an instance as unhealthy, the Auto Scaling group replaces the instance, even if other ones report it as healthy.
My test confirms that behavior with the one exception. Usually people start to configure auto-scaling group with the default settings, which means that the health-check is set to EC2 by default. For the proper work of multiply target groups attached to one auto-scaling group the health check should be set to ELB. If you change it after ASG started up, existing instances are not obey this new setting and retain in the groups.
It may cause the incorrect conclusion like this:
I have tried it, The instances retained even if its marked un healfthy from one target group #prassank
So the answer is:
It is not a good way to attach multiply target groups to a singe auto-scaling group unless you want more strict multiply health checking.

How is "Target Groups" different from "Auto-Scaling Groups" in AWS?

I'm a little too confused on the terms and its usage. Can you please help me understand how are these used with Load Balancers?
I referred the aws-doc in vain for this :(
Target groups are just a group of Ec2 instances. Target groups are closely associated with ELB and not ASG.
ELB -> TG - > Group of Instances
We can just use ELB and Target groups to route requests to EC2 instances. With this setup, there is no autoscaling which means instances cannot be added or removed when your load increases/decreases.
ELB -> TG - > ASG -> Group of Instances
If you want autoscaling, you can attach a TG to ASG which in turn gets associated to ELB. Now with this setup, you get request routing and autoscaling together. Real world usecases follow this pattern. If you detach the target group from the Auto Scaling group, the instances are automatically deregistered from the target group
Hope this helps.
What is a target group?
A target group contains EC2 instances to which a load balancer distributes workload.
A load balancer paired with a target group does NOT yet have auto scaling capability.
What is an Auto Scaling Group (ASG)?
This is where auto scaling comes in. An auto scaling group (ASG) can be attached to a load balancer.
We can attach auto scaling rules to an ASG. Then, when thresholds are met (e.g. CPU utilization), the number of instances will be adjusted programatically.
How to attach an ASG to a load balancer?
For Classic load balancer, link ASG with the load balancer directly
For Application load balancer, link ASG with the target group (which itself is attached to the load balancer)
Auto Scaling Group is just a group of identical instances that AWS can scale out (add a new one) or in (remove) automatically based on some configurations you've specified. You use this to ensure at any point in time, there is the specific number of instances running your application, and when a threshold is reached (like CPU utilization), it scales up or down.
Target Group is a way of getting network traffic routed via specified protocols and ports to specified instances. It's basically load balancing on a port level. This is used mostly to allow accessing many applications running on different ports but the same instance.
Then there are the classical Load Balancers where network traffic is routed between instances.
The doc you referred to is about attaching load balancers (either classical or target group) to an auto-scaling group. This is done so scaling instances can be auto-managed (by the auto scaling group) while still having network traffic routed to these instances based on the load balancer.
Target groups
They listen to HTTP/S request from a Load Balancer
Are the Load Balancer's targets which will be available to handle an HTTP/S request from any kind of clients (Browser, Mobile, Lambda, Etc). A target has a specific purpose like Mobile API processing, Web App processing, Etc. Further, these target groups could contain instances with any kind of characteristics.
AWS Docs
Each target group is used to route requests to one or more registered targets. When you create each listener rule, you specify a target group and conditions. When a rule condition is met, traffic is forwarded to the corresponding target group. You can create different target groups for different types of requests. For example, create one target group for general requests and other target groups for requests to the microservices for your application. Reference
So, a Target Group provides a set of instances to process specific HTTP/S requests.
AutoScaling groups
They are a set of instances who were started up to handle a specific workload, i.e: HTTP requests, SQS' message, Jobs to process any kind of tasks, Etc.
On this side, these groups are a set of instances who were started up by a metric which exceeded a specific threshold and triggered an alarm. The main difference is that Autoscaling groups' instances are temporary and they are available to process anything, from HTTP/S requests until SQS' messages. Further, the instances here are temporary and can be terminated at any time according to the configured metric. Likewise , the Autoscaling groups share the same characteristics because the follow something called Launch Configuration.
AWS Docs
An Auto Scaling group contains a collection of EC2 instances that share similar characteristics and are treated as a logical grouping for the purposes of instance scaling and management. For example, if a single application operates across multiple instances, you might want to increase the number of instances in that group to improve the performance of the application or decrease the number of instances to reduce costs when demand is low. Reference
So, an Autoscaling group not only will be able to process HTTP/S requests but also can process backend stuff, like Jobs to send emails, jobs to process tasks, Etc.
As I understand it, Target Groups is a connection between ELB and EC2 instances. Some kind of a service discovery rules. This layer allows to Target Groups for ECS Services for instance when it's possible to have more than one container per instance.
Auto-Scaling Groups is an abstraction for aggregation of EC2 metrics and taking some actions based on that data.
Also, bear in mind, that the possibility of attaching of Auto-Scaling Groups to ELB comes from the previous generation of ELBs. You may compare the first generation and the second one in the CloudFormation docs.

How do unhealthy instances get onto my AWS load balancer?

We are using CodeDeploy to load code onto our instances as they boot up. Our intention was that they would not be added to the LB prior to the code being loaded. To do this, we set a health check which looked for one of the files being deployed. What we have found is that some times instances without code are created (I assume code deploy failed) and these instances are staying in the LB even when marked unhealthy? How is this possible? Is this related to the grace period? Shouldn't instances that are unhealthy be removed automatically?
I believe I have found a large part of my problem: My Auto-scale group was set to use EC2 health checks and not my ELB health check. This resulted in the instance not being terminated. The traffic may have continued to flow longer to this crippled instance due to the need the need for a very long unhealthy state before having traffic completely stopped.