-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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 collector update PR inv task and fix inv collector.update #31545
Conversation
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 50842050 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests: Jobs:
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 |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 91dc636 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +1.31 | [+1.19, +1.44] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.91 | [+0.85, +0.97] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.67 | [-0.13, +1.48] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.39 | [+0.35, +0.44] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.11 | [-0.66, +0.87] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.44, +0.49] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.83, +0.87] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.77, +0.79] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.81, +0.82] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.81, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.12, +0.09] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.65, +0.60] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | -0.14 | [-0.85, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.23 | [-0.96, +0.50] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.57 | [-0.69, -0.46] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -1.29 | [-4.23, +1.65] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
Explanation
Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%
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
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:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
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.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
Ok for @DataDog/agent-devx-loops owned files |
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
@@ -479,8 +480,8 @@ def update_files(self): | |||
"./tasks/collector.py", | |||
"./.gitlab/integration_test/otel.yml", | |||
] | |||
for root, _, files in os.walk("./tasks/unit_tests/testdata/collector"): | |||
for file in files: | |||
for root, _, testfiles in os.walk("./tasks/unit_tests/testdata/collector"): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this was causing the memory leak when running locally
@@ -64,11 +64,13 @@ def get_branch(self, branch_name): | |||
return None | |||
raise e | |||
|
|||
def create_pr(self, pr_title, pr_body, base_branch, target_branch): | |||
def create_pr(self, pr_title, pr_body, base_branch, target_branch, draft=False): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
was necessary to create a draft PR. I wanted to use a draft PR for this because collector dependency upgrade can break existing tests/codepaths and I want to be able to fix them before marking the PR ready.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the changes!
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
fixes memory leak in
inv collector.update
and moves logic for weekly collector update/generate task to separate bash scriptMotivation
failed GH Actions run: https://github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/actions/runs/12055965363
Describe how to test/QA your changes
run .github/scripts/otel-collector-update-generate.sh with
$GITHUB_TOKEN
in your environmentPossible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes