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

arbitrary devflow test commit #20027

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

spencergilbert
Copy link
Contributor

Test commit to test merge queue, not intended to merge.

@spencergilbert spencergilbert self-assigned this Oct 10, 2023
@spencergilbert spencergilbert changed the base branch from main to amit.slavin/dummy-test October 10, 2023 14:32
@spencergilbert spencergilbert requested review from a team as code owners October 10, 2023 14:32
@spencergilbert spencergilbert requested review from dinooliva and removed request for a team October 10, 2023 14:32
@spencergilbert spencergilbert changed the base branch from amit.slavin/dummy-test to main October 10, 2023 14:32
@spencergilbert spencergilbert removed the request for review from a team October 10, 2023 14:33
@spencergilbert spencergilbert removed request for a team and dinooliva October 10, 2023 14:33
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Oct 10, 2023

Bloop Bleep... Dogbot Here

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: c079eba7-f99f-4a3a-afe3-4f8433de304d
Baseline: 890dd33
Comparison: 7f04c26
Total datadog-agent CPUs: 7

Explanation

A regression test is an integrated performance test for datadog-agent in a repeatable rig, with varying configuration for datadog-agent. What follows is a statistical summary of a brief datadog-agent run for each configuration across SHAs given above. The goal of these tests are to determine quickly if datadog-agent performance is changed and to what degree by a pull request.

Because a target's optimization goal performance in each experiment will vary somewhat each time it is run, we can only estimate mean differences in optimization goal relative to the baseline target. We express these differences as a percentage change relative to the baseline target, denoted "Δ mean %". These estimates are made to a precision that balances accuracy and cost control. We represent this precision as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI": there is a 90.00% chance that the true value of "Δ mean %" is in that interval.

We decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if both of the following two criteria are true:

  1. The estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%. This criterion intends to answer the question "Does the estimated change in mean optimization goal performance have a meaningful impact on your customers?". We assume that when |Δ mean %| < 5.00%, the impact on your customers is not meaningful. We also assume that a performance change in optimization goal is worth investigating whether it is an increase or decrease, so long as the magnitude of the change is sufficiently large.

  2. Zero is not in the 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" about "Δ mean %". This statement is equivalent to saying that there is at least a 90.00% chance that the mean difference in optimization goal is not zero. This criterion intends to answer the question, "Is there a statistically significant difference in mean optimization goal performance?". It also means there is no more than a 10.00% chance this criterion reports a statistically significant difference when the true difference in mean optimization goal is zero -- a "false positive". We assume you are willing to accept a 10.00% chance of inaccurately detecting a change in performance when no true difference exists.

The table below, if present, lists those experiments that have experienced a statistically significant change in mean optimization goal performance between baseline and comparison SHAs with 90.00% confidence OR have been detected as newly erratic. Negative values of "Δ mean %" mean that baseline is faster, whereas positive values of "Δ mean %" mean that comparison is faster. Results that do not exhibit more than a ±5.00% change in their mean optimization goal are discarded. An experiment is erratic if its coefficient of variation is greater than 0.1. The abbreviated table will be omitted if no interesting change is observed.

No interesting changes in experiment optimization goals with confidence ≥ 90.00% and |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%.

Fine details of change detection per experiment.
experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI confidence
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +0.70 [+0.55, +0.84] 100.00%
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_nodist_nomulti_200MiB ingress throughput +0.64 [+0.53, +0.74] 100.00%
trace_agent_json ingress throughput +0.02 [-0.11, +0.14] 17.88%
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.06, +0.06] 2.05%
trace_agent_msgpack ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.11, +0.11] 0.54%
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_nodist_nomulti_100MiB ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.13, +0.13] 0.40%
file_to_blackhole egress throughput +0.00 [-1.38, +1.38] 0.00%
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_nodist_100MiB ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.13, +0.13] 0.31%
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_nodist_200MiB ingress throughput -0.45 [-0.56, -0.35] 100.00%
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -1.09 [-2.66, +0.48] 74.62%
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -2.36 [-4.52, -0.20] 92.82%
file_tree egress throughput -5.48 [-7.31, -3.65] 100.00%

arbitrary devflow test commit 2

Co-authored-by: Spencer Gilbert <spencer.gilbert@datadoghq.com>
@spencergilbert spencergilbert deleted the spencergilbert/devflow-testing branch November 9, 2023 21:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant