Add smoke test for config builder instrumentation issue #6224
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
andrewlock
added
area:tests
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
tracer/test/test-applications/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/Web.config
Dismissed
Show dismissed
Hide dismissed
Datadog ReportBranch report: ✅ 0 Failed, 369352 Passed, 2100 Skipped, 14h 53m 45.83s Total Time |
Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️Execution-time results for samples comparing the following branches/commits: Execution-time benchmarks measure the whole time it takes to execute a program. And are intended to measure the one-off costs. Cases where the execution time results for the PR are worse than latest master results are shown in red. The following thresholds were used for comparing the execution times:
Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see the dashboard. Graphs show the p99 interval based on the mean and StdDev of the test run, as well as the mean value of the run (shown as a diamond below the graph). gantt
title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.6.2)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (70ms) : 68, 73
. : milestone, 70,
master - mean (70ms) : 68, 72
. : milestone, 70,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (1,118ms) : 1095, 1141
. : milestone, 1118,
master - mean (1,119ms) : 1098, 1141
. : milestone, 1119,
gantt
title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (110ms) : 106, 114
. : milestone, 110,
master - mean (110ms) : 107, 114
. : milestone, 110,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (780ms) : 764, 795
. : milestone, 780,
master - mean (782ms) : 763, 801
. : milestone, 782,
gantt
title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 6)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (93ms) : 90, 96
. : milestone, 93,
master - mean (93ms) : 90, 96
. : milestone, 93,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (733ms) : 714, 752
. : milestone, 733,
master - mean (738ms) : 722, 753
. : milestone, 738,
gantt
title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.6.2)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (196ms) : 193, 199
. : milestone, 196,
master - mean (190ms) : 188, 193
. : milestone, 190,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (1,260ms) : 1235, 1286
. : milestone, 1260,
master - mean (1,225ms) : 1202, 1248
. : milestone, 1225,
gantt
title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (285ms) : 280, 290
. : milestone, 285,
master - mean (287ms) : 257, 317
. : milestone, 287,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (983ms) : 967, 1000
. : milestone, 983,
master - mean (952ms) : 931, 973
. : milestone, 952,
gantt
title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6)
dateFormat X
axisFormat %s
todayMarker off
section Baseline
This PR (6224) - mean (272ms) : 267, 277
. : milestone, 272,
master - mean (265ms) : 261, 269
. : milestone, 265,
section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
This PR (6224) - mean (965ms) : 945, 984
. : milestone, 965,
master - mean (953ms) : 917, 990
. : milestone, 953,
|
Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌Benchmarks for #6224 compared to master:
The following thresholds were used for comparing the benchmark speeds:
Allocation changes below 0.5% are ignored. Benchmark detailsBenchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.DbCommandBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.NLogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️Raw results
|
kevingosse
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2024
Comment on lines
+25
to
+26
| #pragma warning disable CS1591 // No xml comments for tag literals. | ||
| #pragma warning restore CS1591 // No xml comments for tag literals. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted a "faithful reproduction" of the issue. This seemed critical 😉
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| // Also, this is a synchronous method. And in single-threaded contexts like ASP.Net | ||
| // it can be bad/dangerous to block on async calls. So lets work some TPL voodoo | ||
| // to avoid potential deadlocks. | ||
| return Task.Run(async () => { return await GetValueAsync(key, string.Empty); }).Result?.Value; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wow you decided to keep this
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I won't hide their shame
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ations/aspnet/Samples.AspNet.MultipleAppsInDomain/CustomConfigBuilder/CustomConfigBuilder.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Kevin Gosse <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary of changes
Adds a smoke test for the issue fixed in #6147
Reason for change
The issue in #6147 is complex and subtle, with a high risk of regression, so we want to have smoke tests to catch it`
Implementation details
Add a sample app very similar to the one tested with in #6147. Without the fix, the test fails with
After the fix (now merged) the tests pass
Test coverage
This is primarily a smoke test, so we confirm
Other details
For some reason, I had massive issues getting the app to "recognize" the
DD_TRACE_AGENT_URL=http://test-agent.windows:8126env var setting that's required to talk to the test agent. I have no idea why, and the only resolution I could find was to use powershell to set the variables inside the docker image