feat(ci): Enable timestamp in logs #32327
Conversation
chouetz
added
changelog/no-changelog
qa/no-code-change
github-actions
bot
added
the
short review
|
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 51423755 (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: 48763aa ❌ Experiments with missing or malformed dataThis is a critical error. No usable optimization goal data was produced by the listed experiments. This may be a result of misconfiguration. Ping #single-machine-performance and we can help out. Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.39 | [-1.61, +4.40] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +1.32 | [+1.18, +1.47] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.21 | [+0.17, +0.26] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.16 | [-0.57, +0.88] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.06, +0.13] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.76, +0.69] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.06 | [-0.19, +0.08] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.10 | [-0.90, +0.70] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.13 | [-0.60, +0.35] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.14 | [-1.00, +0.73] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.22 | [-1.07, +0.64] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.24 | [-0.88, +0.40] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.60 | [-1.36, +0.15] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.68 | [-1.44, +0.08] | 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_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.
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Print timestamps in Gitlab logs. As we moved our gitlab version recently we can enable this feature
Motivation
Having access to the timestamp is a really important feature for a CI provider, very useful for investigation
Describe how you validated your changes
This is a gitlab feature
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
This PR activates timestamp on the whole config. It should be possible to enable it per job.
It seems not possible to change the timestamp format which is quite long
However the full precision can still be useful so I guess we can accept the display impact
Additional Notes