Retrospective · numbers first
Lessons learned running GPU capacity for 14 internal teams
by @diego — Platform SRE for AI workloads
A retrospective on GPU autoscaling on Kubernetes — the headline number, what broke, and the four changes I would make tomorrow.
The first time GPU autoscaling on Kubernetes fell over in front of a customer, I had a dashboard that told me nothing. That is the story below.
The short version
idle GPU spend dropped 46% by scaling on queue depth instead of CPU
What we tried
| Move | What happened |
|---|---|
| Bigger context window | Cost up 3x, accuracy flat |
| Prompt rewrite on its own | +4% on the golden set, then regressed two weeks later |
| Swapping Karpenter for a boring alternative | Same quality, fewer moving parts |
What broke
CPU-based HPA never triggers for GPU pods, because the model is not CPU-bound
Behind almost every incident was a default we inherited and never questioned. A token limit too small. A timeout copied from an HTTP tutorial. A retry loop with no ceiling.
By the numbers
- p50 looked fine the entire time; p99 is where users actually lived
- 60% of "the model is wrong" tickets were retrieval returning the wrong document
- Rolling back a prompt was faster than fixing one — every single time
What I would do differently
- Instrument first: inputs, outputs, latency, token counts, on day one
- Build a 200-example golden set before the second feature, not after the fifth
- Make every external call idempotent and deadline-aware
- Read my own traces for an hour a week, on the calendar
The uncomfortable lesson
Most of what we shipped was ordinary backend engineering wearing an AI hat. None of this was clever. It was just the work nobody wanted to do first.
Comments (2)
Log in to join the discussion.