AWS Under Real Load: Sudden P95 Latency Spikes Without Errors in Amazon S3
.jpeg)
A diagnostic guide to resolving high-percentile latency spikes in Amazon S3 under sustained production traffic.
Problem
An application operating at scale experiences sudden P95 or P99 latency spikes when interacting with Amazon S3.
Typical symptoms:
- Average latency appears normal
- No S3 errors are reported
- No
SlowDownresponses - No throttling alarms trigger
- Users report intermittent slowness
- Latency degradation occurs only during peak traffic
Dashboards look green.
Users disagree.
Clarifying the Issue
This is not an S3 outage.
This is not an IAM issue.
This is not a simple network failure.
Under real load, S3 performance variance can emerge due to:
- Request concentration on specific key prefixes
- Sudden synchronized burst traffic
- Client-side connection pool exhaustion
- Retry amplification under load
- Per-prefix throughput limits being stressed
S3 scales horizontally, but request shape still matters.
While the 2018 S3 update removed the need for randomized prefixes for partitioning, practical throughput guidance still exists — approximately:
- 3,500 PUT/COPY/POST/DELETE requests per second per prefix
- 5,500 GET/HEAD requests per second per prefix
Under concentrated traffic patterns, those limits can manifest as tail latency without explicit throttling errors.
This is distribution behavior, not failure.
Why It Matters
High-percentile latency affects:
- User-facing responsiveness
- Lambda execution windows
- API Gateway timeouts
- Downstream service timing
- Retry amplification loops
- Overall system stability
Averages can remain stable while the right side of the latency distribution stretches.
At scale, tail behavior defines reliability.
Key Terms
P95 / P99 latency – The slowest 5% or 1% of requests
Hot prefix – Concentrated request activity targeting a narrow S3 key range
Burst traffic – Sudden synchronized increases in request volume
Retry amplification – Retries increasing overall system pressure
Connection pool exhaustion – Client-side limit on concurrent HTTP connections
Steps at a Glance
- Confirm tail divergence (P95 vs average)
- Analyze key prefix distribution
- Inspect per-prefix request rates
- Evaluate burst synchronization
- Inspect client connection pooling
- Review retry behavior
- Retest under controlled load
Detailed Steps
Step 1: Confirm Tail Divergence
You cannot debug scale with averages.
Overlay:
- Average latency
- P95 / P99 latency
- Request count
If P95 spikes while average remains stable, you are observing queueing or contention behavior, not systemic service degradation.
Step 2: Analyze Key Distribution
Inspect object key patterns:
- Sequential timestamps
- Date-based folder structures
- Tenant IDs concentrated in small ranges
- High-write prefixes
Use:
- S3 request metrics in CloudWatch
- S3 Storage Lens
- S3 Inventory reports
Look for disproportionate request concentration on a small set of prefixes.
Even without explicit throttling, high concentration can stretch tail latency.
Mitigation:
- Introduce more distributed prefix patterns
- Avoid synchronized writes to identical key paths
- Introduce light randomness if concentration is extreme
Step 3: Inspect Per-Prefix Throughput Rates
Estimate request volume targeting the same prefix.
If traffic approaches or exceeds practical per-prefix throughput guidance, latency variance may appear before throttling does.
This is not failure.
It is saturation behavior.
Mitigation:
- Distribute request load across more prefixes
- Avoid high-frequency writes to identical key paths
- Break large synchronized batch uploads into staggered segments
Step 4: Evaluate Burst Traffic Patterns
Look for synchronized events:
- Cron jobs firing simultaneously
- Auto-scaling events increasing concurrency instantly
- Batch uploads triggered at the same timestamp
- Large customer-driven surges
Sudden synchronized bursts amplify queueing effects.
Mitigation:
- Add jitter to scheduled jobs
- Smooth concurrency ramps
- Stagger batch operations
Load smoothing reduces tail stretch.
Step 5: Inspect Client Connection Pooling
Many latency spikes originate client-side.
Check:
- SDK max connection settings
- HTTP connection pool limits
- Idle timeout configuration
- TCP socket reuse
Default SDK settings are often conservative.
Under high concurrency, connection exhaustion can inflate latency before S3 is ever stressed.
Mitigation:
- Increase connection pool limits appropriately
- Reuse connections effectively
- Align pool size with expected concurrency
Step 6: Review Retry Behavior Under Load
High latency triggers retries.
Retries increase request volume.
Increased volume increases latency further.
This feedback loop creates retry amplification.
Inspect:
- Retry counts
- Backoff strategy
- Timeout thresholds
- Total invocation volume during spikes
Mitigation:
- Use exponential backoff
- Add jitter
- Avoid aggressive retry policies
Step 7: Retest Under Controlled Load
Simulate:
- Gradual ramp-up
- Burst load
- Peak traffic
Observe P95 behavior after mitigation.
If tail latency stabilizes, the issue was load shape and request concentration — not S3 instability.
Pro Tips
- Averages lie. The tail reveals stress.
- Sequential keys are supported — but concentration still matters.
- Retry storms amplify minor latency variance.
- Client connection pools fail silently under pressure.
- Load shape matters more than raw throughput.
Conclusion
Sudden P95 latency spikes in Amazon S3 under real load are typically caused by request distribution, burst synchronization, or client behavior — not service outage.
Once:
- Key distribution is evaluated
- Per-prefix throughput pressure is reduced
- Burst traffic is smoothed
- Connection pooling is tuned
- Retry amplification is controlled
Tail latency stabilizes and user experience improves.
Measure the tail.
Shape the load.
Stabilize the system.
Aaron Rose is a software engineer and technology writer at tech-reader.blog and the author of Think Like a Genius.
Comments
Post a Comment