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

[e2e] recreate stack on fakeintake grpc error #32332

Merged

Conversation

pducolin
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Recreate stack on grpc error from fakeintake

Motivation

We had a couple of internal e2e stack errors with this message, worth recreating the stack as the fakeintake cannot recover

Describe how you validated your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@pducolin pducolin added changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Dec 18, 2024
@pducolin pducolin requested review from a team as code owners December 18, 2024 11:23
@github-actions github-actions bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Dec 18, 2024
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=51427029 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit a579bec

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor 459aa24aad5a8903db6b58266b7497a7ecf33509

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 78.59MB 78.59MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 78.67MB 78.67MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 78.67MB 78.67MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB 55.79MB 55.79MB 10.00MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 505.06MB 505.06MB 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
datadog-agent-amd64-deb -0.00MB 1187.77MB 1187.77MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm -0.00MB 1197.00MB 1197.01MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse -0.00MB 1197.00MB 1197.01MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm -0.02MB 942.99MB 943.00MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb -0.02MB 933.77MB 933.79MB 140.00MB

Decision

✅ Passed

Copy link

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 8ae2259f-a4fa-44f5-844c-2f07d24e40eb

Baseline: 459aa24
Comparison: a579bec
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +2.78 [-0.17, +5.72] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization +0.79 [+0.65, +0.93] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.33 [+0.20, +0.46] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +0.21 [-0.52, +0.93] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput +0.15 [-0.49, +0.78] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.06 [-0.82, +0.95] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.04 [-0.75, +0.84] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.00 [-0.71, +0.71] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.09, +0.09] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.00 [-0.90, +0.90] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput -0.02 [-0.88, +0.84] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.03 [-0.07, +0.01] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.07 [-0.86, +0.72] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput -0.43 [-0.90, +0.03] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.74 [-0.80, -0.67] 1 Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -1.33 [-2.03, -0.63] 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:

  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, 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.

@pducolin
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Dec 19, 2024

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.


2024-12-19 09:36:30 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 26m.


2024-12-19 09:47:51 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: Retrying because previous merge request failed


2024-12-19 10:25:08 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 3c2d6cb into main Dec 19, 2024
412 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the pducolin/ADXT-813-recreate-on-fakeintake-grpc-error branch December 19, 2024 10:25
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 7.62.0 milestone Dec 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants