Stabilize API HTTP alarms and remove thumbnails alarms runbooks

[krysal]

Fixes

Closes #2500 by @sarayourfriend
Closes #2502 by @sarayourfriend
Closes #2503 by @sarayourfriend

Description

This PR marks the 2xx & 5xx count over time alarms of the API as stabilized in runbooks. Since they've been running for a while, the 5xx alarm has confirmed several incidents, and while we have not had a sudden increase in requests but we still believe the alarm for 2xx responses could be useful in the future. Also, given we aren't using anymore a separated service for thumbnails it get rids of all the alarms related to that service as well.

Testing Instructions

Just check the updates docs are correct, reviewing from the link on the comment below or from the code 📖

Checklist

• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title likeUpdate index.md).
• My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main) or a parent feature branch.
• My commit messages follow best practices.
• My code follows the established code style of the repository.
• [N/A] I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
• I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
• I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no visible errors.
• [N/A] I ran the DAG documentation generator (if applicable).

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

[krysal]

@dhruvkb For some reason, the @openverse-bot added the label aspect: code in this PR even when it doesn't touch any code and I had already created it with an aspect label, it wasn't necessary to add that 🤔

[github-actions]

Full-stack documentation: https://docs.openverse.org/_preview/3523

Please note that GitHub pages takes a little time to deploy newly pushed code, if the links above don't work or you see old versions, wait 5 minutes and try again.

You can check the GitHub pages deployment action list to see the current status of the deployments.

Changed files 🔄:

• https://docs.openverse.org/_preview/3523/meta/monitoring/runbooks/api_http_2xx_under_threshold.html
• https://docs.openverse.org/_preview/3523/meta/monitoring/runbooks/api_http_5xx_above_threshold.html
• https://docs.openverse.org/_preview/3523/meta/monitoring/runbooks/index.html

[AetherUnbound]

Yay for removing alarms! I have a few comments/notes for the stabilized alarms.

[AetherUnbound]

Oh nooo, it looks like our GitHub username parser is interpreting these as usernames 😅

I think this runbook directory might have a few such cases, since viewing Log Insights is pretty common. Would you mind adding a way to exclude that particular folder from the username parsing script?

[sarayourfriend]

@AetherUnbound Can't that be a separate issue? I don't think it needs to block this information getting into main, at least?

Here's an issue for it: #3542 (update:) ... and here's a PR 🙂 #3543

[sarayourfriend]

LGTM!

[openverse-bot]

Based on the high urgency of this PR, the following reviewers are being gently reminded to review this PR:

@AetherUnbound
@dhruvkb
This reminder is being automatically generated due to the urgency configuration.

Excluding weekend¹ days, this PR was ready for review 2 day(s) ago. PRs labelled with high urgency are expected to be reviewed within 2 weekday(s)².

@krysal, if this PR is not ready for a review, please draft it to prevent reviewers from getting further unnecessary pings.

Footnotes

1. Specifically, Saturday and Sunday. ↩

2. For the purpose of these reminders we treat Monday - Friday as weekdays. Please note that the operation that generates these reminders runs at midnight UTC on Monday - Friday. This means that depending on your timezone, you may be pinged outside of the expected range. ↩