test: ci system tests - test failure #8815
Closed
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
Adds support for submitting coverage data using the CI Visibility manual API. The `CICoverageData` class is used as a container. One of the features it will enable is adding coverage data "a piece at a time" instead of one-shotting the entire coverage data (which is still possible). This will be useful for cases where tests don't run in-order within suites (which is possible in cases like `pytest-xdist`). Two worthwhile mentions compared to existing approach to coverage: - paths are stored using `pathlib.Path` rather than strings - paths are stored as absolute paths (by calling `.absolute()` on all given `Paths` objects) ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [x] Title is accurate - [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [x] Description motivates each change - [x] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting) --------- Co-authored-by: Federico Mon <federico.mon@datadoghq.com> Co-authored-by: Teague Bick <teague.bick@datadoghq.com> Co-authored-by: Emmett Butler <723615+emmettbutler@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR fixes the AWS bedrock integration to default tag an empty string if an input parameter is not provided (preivously we defaulted to `"None"`), as that led to casting errors on the LLMObs integration side when we try to cast the span tag value to an int/float. Now, we default tag to an empty string, which avoids the casting errors we had previously, and only add the `max_tokens` parameter to the LLMObs span event if it is a non-null value. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [X] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [X] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [x] Title is accurate - [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [x] Description motivates each change - [x] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
This PR fixes three things: - An issue in the LLMObs' OpenAI integration which stores tool calls (via the Chat Completions endpoint). Chat completions for tool calls return a list of tool calls, but we had previously assumed only one tool call would be returned. - How we construct streamed tool chat completions. We were previously checking the first chunk in the response to know to join the `tool/function_call` chunk fields together, but it appears that the first chunk in a response can actually contain no data at all. We are now constructing the streamed response chunk-by-chunk. - Add type checking for request messages arg in the chat completions endpoint, as OpenAI allows users to pass in OpenAI `ChatMessage` class types. We were previously only looking for dictionary arguments, but now we'll correctly extract the message content based on the message type. No changelog is required as this only affects private beta customers for LLMObs. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [X] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [X] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [x] Title is accurate - [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [x] Description motivates each change - [x] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
## Overview This PR adds the [`dramatiq`](https://github.com/Bogdanp/dramatiq/tree/master) library as a supported integration for `dd-trace-py`. This addresses #5043. ### In Scope for this PR - Instrumenting the `dramatiq.actor.Actor.send_with_options()` method. This is the method called when a function with the `@dramatiq.actor` decorator is called asynchronously. See example below: ```python # app.py import dramatiq from flask import Flask app = Flask(__name__) @dramatiq.actor def my_func(): return "response" @dramatiq.actor def my_other_func(a: int, b: int) -> int: return a + b @app.route('/') def index(): my_func.send() # this calls send_with_options() under the hood my_other_func.send_with_options(args=(1, 1), options={"max_retries": 3}) return 'hello world' if __name__ == '__main__': app.run(host='0.0.0.0', port=6060) ``` Running the above example Flask app with `ddtrace-run flask run` and hitting the `/` endpoint would generate a trace in the UI like the following: <img width="1052" alt="Screenshot 2024-03-26 at 3 28 21 PM" src="https://github.com/DataDog/dd-trace-py/assets/153395705/78c6e832-c406-4829-92ac-799821fc2e31"> The detailed span info for `my_other_func.send_with_options(...)` would look something like this: ```python { actor: { name: my_other_func options: {"max_retries": 3} } env: test language: python span: { kind: producer } } ``` #### NOTE - The duration of the span is of the `send_with_options()` call itself, and not reflective of the execution duration of the function being asynchronously completed. - When calling a function asynchronously with `send()`, it will also display on the UI as a `send_with_options()` span. This is because `send()` calls `send_with_options()` with empty options, so tracing both of these functions would create two spans for every instance that `send()` is called, with the exact same span information. ### Out of Scope for this PR - All other `dramatiq` methods. - Supporting the actual duration of the function executed asynchronously by `send_with_options()` The above and additional features can be investigated and added to this initial iteration at a later time. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [ ] Title is accurate - [ ] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [ ] Description motivates each change - [ ] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [ ] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [ ] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [ ] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [ ] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [ ] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
CI: Slashes system tests running time in half (~40 min to ~20). Main drawback for this approach: Doubles actual usage time. We can group the scenarios to reduce the overhead, since most of them take ~1 min to run, and now an extra ~1 min to fetch the docker images. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [x] Title is accurate - [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [x] Description motivates each change - [x] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
This reverts commit ef4d804 from #8791, which broke CI on the main branch. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [ ] Title is accurate - [ ] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [ ] Description motivates each change - [ ] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [ ] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [ ] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [ ] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [ ] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [ ] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
…#8798) This PR adds support to the botocore integration's bedrock service to correctly tag input/output messages from Anthropic calls. Previously bedrock's models only supported raw text prompts and returned text outputs. However, Anthropic's newest claude 3 supports a chat message API, which means we need to support that as well. This change also switches to using `tracer.trace()` instead of `tracer.start_span(..., activate=False)` for bedrock spans, because the latter meant that bedrock spans would always be root spans (messing up parenting for traces containing non-root bedrock spans). Additionally by getting rid of the `activate=False` argument, this means that bedrock spans will now continue to be the active span until the stream/body is completely consumed. Previously we allowed bedrock spans to not be active, but if other downstream operations happen in the bedrock span then they would not correctly be child spans of the bedrock spans. ## Checklist - [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description - [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR - [x] Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability) - [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] [Library release note guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html) are followed or label `changelog/no-changelog` is set - [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)) - [x] Backport labels are set (if [applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)) - [x] If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified `@DataDog/apm-tees`. - [x] If change touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`. ## Reviewer Checklist - [x] Title is accurate - [x] All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal - [x] Description motivates each change - [x] Avoids breaking [API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces) changes - [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks - [X] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation) - [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library - [x] Author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment - [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the [release branch maintenance policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
This reverts commit 998cb34.
…_for_exploit_prevention' into gnufede/ci-system-tests-test-fail
gnufede
changed the title
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| res.append(f"File: {f.read()}") | ||
| except Exception as e: | ||
| res.append(f"Error: {e}") | ||
| return "<\\br>\n".join(res) |
Check warning
Code scanning / CodeQL
Information exposure through an exception Medium
BenchmarksBenchmark execution time: 2024-04-01 15:54:32 Comparing candidate commit a087073 in PR branch Found 4 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 195 metrics, 9 unstable metrics. scenario:httppropagationextract-b3_single_headers
scenario:httppropagationextract-full_t_id_datadog_headers
scenario:httppropagationextract-large_header_no_matches
scenario:httppropagationextract-medium_header_no_matches
scenario:httppropagationextract-wsgi_large_header_no_matches
scenario:httppropagationextract-wsgi_medium_header_no_matches
|
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.
Checklist
changelog/no-changelogis set@DataDog/apm-tees.@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance.Reviewer Checklist