[GSTG] Rollout mailroom's webhook delivery strategy
Production Change
Change Summary
This MR configure MailRoom to use Webhook delivery method. This change would make MailRoom deliver email raw content (EML file) to Rails via webhook, instead of pushing the content directly to Redis queue. For more information, please read &644 (closed).
Change Details
- Services Impacted - ServiceMailroom
- Change Technician - @qmnguyen0711
- Change Reviewer - @alejandro
- Time tracking - changeunscheduled
- Downtime Component - N/A
Detailed steps for the change
Pre-Change Steps - steps to be completed before execution of the change
Estimated Time to Complete (mins) - 30 mins
-
Set label changein-progress on this issue -
Ensure the mailroom version is bumped to 0.0.19 (#6343 (closed)) -
Bump GitLab chart version, merge this MR: gitlab-com/gl-infra/k8s-workloads/gitlab-com!1553 (merged)
Change Steps - steps to take to execute the change
Estimated Time to Complete (mins) - 1 hour
-
Create those two secrets in GKMS for gstg and pre, following this guideline -
omnibus-gitlab.gitlab_rb.gitlab-rails.incoming_email_auth_token
: a 32-char base64 string -
omnibus-gitlab.gitlab_rb.gitlab-rails.service_desk_email_auth_token
: a 32-char base64 string - The string can be generated with
ruby -e 'require "securerandom"; puts SecureRandom.base64(32)'
-
-
Switch MailRoom to use webhook delivery method. Merge this MR: gitlab-com/gl-infra/k8s-workloads/gitlab-com!1524 (merged)
Post-Change Steps - steps to take to verify the change
Estimated Time to Complete (mins) - 10 mins
-
Open this test project's setting on staging -
Sent an email from your personal/work email account to the configured "Email address to use for Support Desk". -
Ensure the email is sent -
An issue must be created in the issue list
Rollback
Rollback steps - steps to be taken in the event of a need to rollback this change
Estimated Time to Complete (mins) - 30 mins
-
Rollback gitlab-com/gl-infra/k8s-workloads/gitlab-com!1553 (merged) -
Rollback gitlab-com/gl-infra/k8s-workloads/gitlab-com!1524 (merged)
Monitoring
Key metrics to observe
-
Metric: EmailReceiverWorker and ServiceDeskReceiverWorker Sidekiq metrics
- Location: https://dashboards.gitlab.net/d/sidekiq-worker-detail/sidekiq-worker-detail?orgId=1&var-PROMETHEUS_DS=Global&var-environment=gstg&var-stage=main&var-worker=EmailReceiverWorker&var-worker=ServiceDeskEmailReceiverWorker
- What changes to this metric should prompt a rollback: RPS drops to 0, or the error rate increases
-
Metric: EmailReceiverWorker and ServiceDeskReceiverWorker Sidekiq logs
- Location: https://nonprod-log.gitlab.net/goto/c82298b0-8daa-11ec-b3a6-472d0398dd6e
- What changes to this metric should prompt a rollback: unexpected high rate.
-
Metric: Internal API logs
- Location: https://nonprod-log.gitlab.net/goto/19620120-8dab-11ec-b3a6-472d0398dd6e
- After the configuration is rolled out, we must be sure that mailroom triggers webhook to internal endpoints. So, there must be some lines of logs from
POST /api/v4/internal/mail_room/*
Summary of infrastructure changes
-
Does this change introduce new compute instances? -
Does this change re-size any existing compute instances? -
Does this change introduce any additional usage of tooling like Elastic Search, CDNs, Cloudflare, etc?
Summary of the above
Change Reviewer checklist
-
The scheduled day and time of execution of the change is appropriate. -
The change plan is technically accurate. -
The change plan includes estimated timing values based on previous testing. -
The change plan includes a viable rollback plan. -
The specified metrics/monitoring dashboards provide sufficient visibility for the change.
-
The complexity of the plan is appropriate for the corresponding risk of the change. (i.e. the plan contains clear details). -
The change plan includes success measures for all steps/milestones during the execution. -
The change adequately minimizes risk within the environment/service. -
The performance implications of executing the change are well-understood and documented. -
The specified metrics/monitoring dashboards provide sufficient visibility for the change. - If not, is it possible (or necessary) to make changes to observability platforms for added visibility? -
The change has a primary and secondary SRE with knowledge of the details available during the change window.
Change Technician checklist
-
This issue has a criticality label (e.g. C1, C2, C3, C4) and a change-type label (e.g. changeunscheduled, changescheduled) based on the Change Management Criticalities. -
This issue has the change technician as the assignee. -
Pre-Change, Change, Post-Change, and Rollback steps and have been filled out and reviewed. -
This Change Issue is linked to the appropriate Issue and/or Epic -
Necessary approvals have been completed based on the Change Management Workflow. -
Change has been tested in staging and results noted in a comment on this issue. -
A dry-run has been conducted and results noted in a comment on this issue. -
SRE on-call has been informed prior to change being rolled out. (In #production channel, mention @sre-oncall
and this issue and await their acknowledgement.) -
Release managers have been informed (If needed! Cases include DB change) prior to change being rolled out. (In #production channel, mention @release-managers
and this issue and await their acknowledgment.) -
There are currently no active incidents.
Edited by Bob Van Landuyt