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

Update python version used in workflows to the one of the repo #32404

Conversation

pgimalac
Copy link
Member

This is the same as #32155, but the MQ didn't want to let me merge that one...

What does this PR do?

Set the python version used in workflows to the one of the repo.

Motivation

It's safer to use the same version as the one we build the agent with, and have every workflow use the same version.
I initially wanted to update the version for some workflows owned by my team and thought I could update them all.

Describe how you validated your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

If you don't want one of these changes let me know and I'll remove it.

@pgimalac pgimalac added changelog/no-changelog team/agent-shared-components qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Dec 19, 2024
@pgimalac pgimalac requested review from a team as code owners December 19, 2024 16:42
@github-actions github-actions bot added the long review PR is complex, plan time to review it label Dec 19, 2024
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 51583925 (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

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor 2ca6541f64b17e461abe0902bc8cb04a25364d7c

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 1187.70MB 1187.70MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 1196.96MB 1196.96MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 1196.96MB 1196.96MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 933.69MB 933.69MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 942.93MB 942.93MB 140.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 78.57MB 78.57MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 78.64MB 78.64MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 78.64MB 78.64MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB 55.77MB 55.77MB 10.00MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 504.86MB 504.86MB 70.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 113.31MB 113.31MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 113.38MB 113.38MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 113.38MB 113.38MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 108.78MB 108.78MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 108.85MB 108.85MB 10.00MB

Decision

✅ Passed

Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Dec 19, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: a5a7f8f8-517a-44ab-babc-c468e67c05d1

Baseline: 2ca6541
Comparison: dc6c5bb
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +2.43 [+1.74, +3.12] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.69 [+0.65, +0.73] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.45 [+0.37, +0.53] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.16 [-0.63, +0.94] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput +0.03 [-0.61, +0.68] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.69, +0.73] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput +0.02 [-0.85, +0.89] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.11, +0.12] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput -0.02 [-0.88, +0.85] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.06 [-0.93, +0.80] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.11 [-0.89, +0.66] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.16 [-0.28, -0.03] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput -0.20 [-0.66, +0.27] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.37 [-0.44, -0.31] 1 Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -0.62 [-1.29, +0.04] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -3.56 [-6.68, -0.45] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency lost_bytes 8/10
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency lost_bytes 9/10
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:

  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".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, 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_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@pgimalac
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Dec 23, 2024

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.


2024-12-23 14:25:10 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This merge request is not mergeable yet, because of pending checks/missing approvals. It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.


2024-12-23 18:25:13 UTC ⚠️ MergeQueue: This merge request was unqueued

[email protected] unqueued this merge request: It did not become mergeable within the expected time

@pgimalac pgimalac removed the request for review from jackgopack4 December 23, 2024 14:45
@pgimalac
Copy link
Member Author

Original PR was force merged 👍

@pgimalac pgimalac closed this Dec 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-shared-components
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants