Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Datadog Exporter #25035

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
May 6, 2024
Merged

Add Datadog Exporter #25035

merged 17 commits into from
May 6, 2024

Conversation

dineshg13
Copy link
Member

@dineshg13 dineshg13 commented Apr 23, 2024

What does this PR do?

The PR adds Datadog Exporter . It is thin wrapper around other exporter we have.
Datadog Exporter in Agent and Datadog Exporter in collector will share the code for exporting each data type .

We can't convert DD exporter as module at the moment as it has other agent dependencies. Will do so in the future PRs.

Motivation

Additional Notes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Describe how to test/QA your changes

Comment on lines +38 to +40
// APIConfig defines the API configuration options
type APIConfig struct {
// Key is the Datadog API key to associate your Agent's data with your organization.
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This config is same as Datadog exporter config. In future we should ensure both exporters use same config.

@dineshg13 dineshg13 marked this pull request as ready for review April 23, 2024 21:02
@dineshg13 dineshg13 requested a review from a team as a code owner April 23, 2024 21:02
@dineshg13 dineshg13 requested review from dinooliva and songy23 and removed request for dinooliva April 23, 2024 21:02
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Apr 23, 2024

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=33669179 --os-family=ubuntu

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Apr 23, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 7e1677ae-4db0-4185-a527-f277d9511792
Baseline: 57020d1
Comparison: 4a3bb49

Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:

  • ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
  • ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
  • ➖ = no significant change in performance

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI
file_to_blackhole % cpu utilization +3.21 [-2.67, +9.09]

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI
file_to_blackhole % cpu utilization +3.21 [-2.67, +9.09]
file_tree memory utilization +1.64 [+1.52, +1.76]
process_agent_real_time_mode memory utilization +0.36 [+0.31, +0.41]
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +0.09 [-0.28, +0.46]
process_agent_standard_check memory utilization +0.07 [+0.01, +0.13]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.04 [-0.16, +0.24]
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.03 [-0.01, +0.07]
trace_agent_json ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.01, +0.01]
trace_agent_msgpack ingress throughput -0.01 [-0.02, +0.01]
idle memory utilization -0.16 [-0.21, -0.11]
process_agent_standard_check_with_stats memory utilization -0.17 [-0.22, -0.12]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -0.33 [-3.17, +2.51]
basic_py_check % cpu utilization -0.46 [-3.04, +2.13]
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -1.25 [-22.57, +20.08]
pycheck_1000_100byte_tags % cpu utilization -1.73 [-6.20, +2.75]

Explanation

A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".

For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:

  1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

  2. Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.

  3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

Copy link
Member

@songy23 songy23 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One meta comment: a bunch of the configs do not apply to otel agent, e.g. logs.dump_payloads host_metadata etc. If those are set should they result in config warnings?

@dineshg13
Copy link
Member Author

@songy23 We should aim to have same config for both DD exporter in Agent vs DD exporter in collector. Hence I tried to replicate all the config. Some of the config would be noop for OTel agent

@songy23
Copy link
Member

songy23 commented Apr 24, 2024

Yes - my point is we should warn the users in config_warnings for configs that are no-op in OTel agent. Otherwise they will wonder why the same config has effect in collector contrib but not in otel agent.

Copy link
Member

@songy23 songy23 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Discussed offline, will make the change above in a follow-up PR.

@dineshg13 dineshg13 requested review from a team as code owners April 29, 2024 15:24
lf := logsagentexporter.NewFactory(logch)
lc := &logsagentexporter.Config{
OtelSource: "otel_agent",
LogSourceName: "otelcol",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
LogSourceName: "otelcol",
LogSourceName: "otlp_log_ingestion",

as we discussed

lf := logsagentexporter.NewFactory(logch)
lc := &logsagentexporter.Config{
OtelSource: "otel_agent",
LogSourceName: "otelcol",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should be set to logsagentexporter.logSourceName ("OTLP log ingestion") to be consistent

@dineshg13
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

Copy link
Contributor

@CelianR CelianR left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM for ci-experience files

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 6, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue

Pull request added to the queue.

There are 6 builds ahead! (estimated merge in less than 3h)

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 6, 2024

❌ MergeQueue

Build pipeline has failing jobs for c3765c9

Since those jobs are not marked as being allowed to fail, the pipeline will most likely fail.
Therefore, and to allow other builds to be processed, this merge request has been rejected before the end of the pipeline.

You should have a look at the pipeline, wait for the build to finish and investigate the failures.
When you are ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!

⚠️ Do NOT retry failed jobs directly.

They were executed on a temporary branch created by the merge queue. If you retry them, they are going to fail because the branch no longer exists.

Details

List of failed jobs:

Go to failed Gitlab pipeline.

If you need support, contact us on Slack #devflow with those details!

@dineshg13
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 6, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue

Pull request added to the queue.

There are 2 builds ahead! (estimated merge in less than 1h)

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 4e02f47 into main May 6, 2024
195 of 196 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the dinesh.gurumurthy/OASIS-13 branch May 6, 2024 18:07
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 7.55.0 milestone May 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants