feat(notify): Add conductor scheduled pipelines to the notification rules #32094
Conversation
chouetz
added
changelog/no-changelog
qa/no-code-change
|
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 50969114 (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 |
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
tasks/libs/notify/utils.py
Outdated
| if ( | ||
| os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] != 'pipeline' | ||
| or os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | ||
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID | ||
| ): | ||
| return True | ||
| return False |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if ( | |
| os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] != 'pipeline' | |
| or os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | |
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID | |
| ): | |
| return True | |
| return False | |
| return ( | |
| os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] != 'pipeline' | |
| or os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | |
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID | |
| ) |
❓ question: This would be shorter and still readable imo, WDYT?
| @@ -43,3 +44,28 @@ def get_ci_visibility_job_url( | |||
| extra_args = ''.join([f'&{key}={value}' for key, value in extra_args.items()]) | |||
|
|
|||
| return CI_VISIBILITY_JOB_URL.format(name=name, extra_flags=extra_flags, extra_args=extra_args) | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def should_notify(): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💬 suggestion: A docstring would be nice here imo if the function is meant to be used elsewhere
| return False | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def notification_type(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💬 suggestion: A docstring would be nice here imo if the function is meant to be used elsewhere
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: e49efd5 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +1.43 | [+1.37, +1.49] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.80 | [+0.67, +0.92] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.58 | [+0.44, +0.72] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.52 | [+0.48, +0.57] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.46 | [-0.23, +1.16] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.19 | [-0.27, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.11 | [-0.53, +0.74] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.06 | [-0.63, +0.75] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.87, +0.91] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.78, +0.76] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.11, +0.09] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.92, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.89, +0.76] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -0.25 | [-3.21, +2.72] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.42 | [-1.21, +0.38] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -1.49 | [-2.21, -0.77] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_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 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 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_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
Gitlab CI Configuration ChangesModified Jobsnotify notify:
dependencies: []
image: registry.ddbuild.io/slack-notifier:v27936653-9a2a7db-sdm-gbi-jammy@sha256:c9d1145319d1904fa72ea97904a15200d3cb684324723f9e1700bc02cc85065c
resource_group: notification
rules:
- if: $DEPLOY_AGENT == "true" || $DDR_WORKFLOW_ID != null
when: always
- if: $CI_COMMIT_BRANCH == "main"
when: always
- if: $CI_COMMIT_BRANCH =~ /^[0-9]+\.[0-9]+\.x$/
when: always
script:
- GITLAB_TOKEN=$($CI_PROJECT_DIR/tools/ci/fetch_secret.sh $GITLAB_TOKEN read_api)
|| exit $?; export GITLAB_TOKEN
- DD_API_KEY=$($CI_PROJECT_DIR/tools/ci/fetch_secret.sh $AGENT_API_KEY_ORG2 token)
|| exit $?; export DD_API_KEY
- python3 -m pip install -r requirements.txt -r tasks/libs/requirements-notifications.txt
+ - invoke -e notify.send-message
+ - invoke -e notify.check-consistent-failures
- - "# Do not send notifications if this is a child pipeline of another repo\n# The\
- \ triggering repo should already have its own notification system\nif [ \"$CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE\"\
- \ != \"pipeline\" ]; then\n if [ \"$DEPLOY_AGENT\" = \"true\" ]; then\n invoke\
- \ -e notify.send-message --notification-type \"deploy\"\n elif [ \"$CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE\"\
- \ != \"push\" ]; then\n invoke -e notify.send-message --notification-type \"\
- trigger\"\n else\n invoke -e notify.send-message --notification-type \"merge\"\
- \n fi\n if [ \"$CI_COMMIT_BRANCH\" = \"$CI_DEFAULT_BRANCH\" ]; then\n invoke\
- \ notify.check-consistent-failures\n fi\nelse\n echo \"This pipeline was triggered\
- \ by another repository, skipping notification.\"\nfi\n"
stage: notify
tags:
- arch:amd64
timeout: 15 minutesChanges Summary
ℹ️ Diff available in the job log. |
| or os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | ||
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❓ question
Don't you need to wrap it in parenthesis?
| or os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | |
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID | |
| or (os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE'] == 'pipeline' | |
| and pipeline.user['id'] == CONDUCTOR_ID) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not needed because a or b and c == a or (b and c)
>>> for a in [True, False]:
... for b in [True, False]:
... for c in [True, False]:
... print(a or b and c, a or (b and c), (a or b) and c)
...
True True True
True True False
True True True
True True False
True True True
False False False
False False False
False False False
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Add a rule to the notification system so that pipelines scheduled by conductor are reported to the agent-ci channels.
I took the opportunity to move the
notification decisionlogic from the shell script to the python invoke taskMotivation
Conductor nightly pipelines are important to monitor, but were dismissed so far because they are
downstreampipelines. We can filter them in using the pipeline user id (this information is not available on the gitlab predefined variableshttps://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/ACIX-507
Describe how you validated your changes
I added some unit/integrated tests on this topic
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes