-
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
[test-infra-definitions][automated] Bump test-infra-definitions to e015462e5f6108e23a8f0c9b1d8b0c3c54d9d265 #32424
Conversation
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 51656855 (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 |
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 395cb8e Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.95 | [+0.86, +1.03] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.79 | [+0.07, +1.51] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.69 | [+0.65, +0.72] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.28 | [+0.22, +0.33] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.13 | [-0.33, +0.60] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.06 | [-0.78, +0.91] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.84, +0.92] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.70, +0.78] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.61, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.11, +0.12] | 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 | [-0.79, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.10 | [-0.23, +0.04] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.11 | [-1.03, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.33 | [-1.12, +0.46] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -1.32 | [-2.00, -0.64] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -2.00 | [-5.21, +1.22] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
✅ | 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 | 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_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.
Closing PR since it is considered stale compared to #32428. If you really want to merge this PR feel free to re-open it |
This PR was automatically created by the test-infra-definitions bump task.
This PR bumps the test-infra-definitions submodule to e015462e5f6108e23a8f0c9b1d8b0c3c54d9d265 from 221bbc806266.
Here is the full changelog between the two commits: DataDog/test-infra-definitions@221bbc8...e015462
qa/no-code-change
andchangelog/no-changelog
labels by default. Please make sure this is appropriate