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

Transfer ownership from telemetry-and-analytics to apm-trace-storage #29739

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024

Conversation

yshapiro-57
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

This records the agreement between APM Trace Storage and the former APM Analytics team to have Trace Storage take over the ownership of services formerly owned by APM Analytics at the end of Q3

Motivation

Transfer ownership of APM Analytics code to Trace Storage

Describe how to test/QA your changes

Make sure CI passes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@yshapiro-57 yshapiro-57 requested review from a team October 2, 2024 17:30
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Oct 2, 2024

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 45654370 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests:

Jobs:
  • tests_deb-arm64-py3
  • tests_deb-x64-py3
  • tests_flavor_dogstatsd_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_heroku_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_iot_deb-x64
  • tests_rpm-arm64-py3
  • tests_rpm-x64-py3
  • tests_windows-x64

If you modified Go files and expected unit tests to run in these jobs, please double check the job logs. If you think tests should have been executed reach out to #agent-devx-help

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Oct 2, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: ede485df-e225-4ec6-8be4-f8ef4e7a40bd Metrics dashboard Target profiles

Baseline: 8747c73
Comparison: a5d3057

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.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
basic_py_check % cpu utilization +1.41 [-1.38, +4.19] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.03 [-0.13, +0.07] 1 Logs
idle memory utilization -0.05 [-0.09, +0.00] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.15 [-0.19, -0.11] 1 Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -0.21 [-1.02, +0.61] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.31 [-0.41, -0.22] 1 Logs
idle_all_features memory utilization -0.61 [-0.68, -0.55] 1 Logs
pycheck_lots_of_tags % cpu utilization -0.80 [-3.24, +1.65] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -1.00 [-1.73, -0.28] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed
idle memory_usage 10/10

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".

@yshapiro-57 yshapiro-57 modified the milestones: 7.57.0, 7.59.0 Oct 2, 2024
@yshapiro-57 yshapiro-57 marked this pull request as ready for review October 2, 2024 18:37
@yshapiro-57 yshapiro-57 requested review from a team as code owners October 2, 2024 18:37
Copy link
Contributor

@amenasria amenasria left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM !

@yshapiro-57
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Oct 3, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 25m.

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 43d2c6d into main Oct 3, 2024
219 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the yakov.shapiro/MLOB-1652/update-codepwners branch October 3, 2024 12:31
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.

4 participants