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

Struct Tags need to be copied by ProviderComponentConstructor #28137

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 2, 2024

Conversation

dustmop
Copy link
Contributor

@dustmop dustmop commented Aug 1, 2024

What does this PR do?

Fx value groups do not work properly currently because the fxutil helper function doesn't copy struct tags. Fix that and add tests to ensure that value groups work.

Motivation

Workloadmeta conversion into the new component layout discovered this bug.

Additional Notes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Describe how to test/QA your changes

Functionality covered by unit tests

Fx value groups do not work properly currently because the fxutil helper function doesn't copy struct tags. Fix that and add tests to ensure that value groups work.
@dustmop dustmop added changelog/no-changelog team/agent-shared-components qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests labels Aug 1, 2024
@dustmop dustmop added this to the 7.57.0 milestone Aug 1, 2024
@dustmop dustmop requested a review from a team as a code owner August 1, 2024 19:33
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Aug 1, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: d6c4ec0e-604f-4120-8314-0c4c6bce2292 Metrics dashboard Target profiles

Baseline: 1039270
Comparison: 87e9e2c

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI links
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +3.53 [-9.49, +16.55] Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +0.53 [-0.28, +1.34] Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.00, +0.00] Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] Logs
basic_py_check % cpu utilization -0.03 [-2.63, +2.57] Logs
pycheck_1000_100byte_tags % cpu utilization -0.03 [-4.84, +4.77] Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -0.23 [-1.12, +0.66] Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.48 [-0.54, -0.41] Logs
idle memory utilization -0.68 [-0.71, -0.65] Logs

Explanation

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".

@dustmop
Copy link
Contributor Author

dustmop commented Aug 2, 2024

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Aug 2, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This merge request is not mergeable yet, because of pending checks/missing approvals. It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dustmop
Copy link
Contributor Author

dustmop commented Aug 2, 2024

/merge --cancel

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Aug 2, 2024

⚠️ MergeQueue: This merge request was unqueued

This merge request was unqueued

If you need support, contact us on Slack #devflow!

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Aug 2, 2024

Test changes on VM

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

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=40765737 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit 87e9e2c

@dustmop
Copy link
Contributor Author

dustmop commented Aug 2, 2024

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Aug 2, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 23m.

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit ba20d87 into main Aug 2, 2024
214 of 218 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the dustin.long/fx-provide-tags branch August 2, 2024 12:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/agent-shared-components
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants