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

chore(ci): add macrobenchmarks to pipeline #9131

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 30, 2024
Merged

Conversation

gnufede
Copy link
Member

@gnufede gnufede commented Apr 30, 2024

Enables first stage (only tracing) macrobenchmarks on gitlab CI.

Checklist

  • Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description
  • Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR
  • Risks are described (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability)
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation)
  • Library release note guidelines are followed or label changelog/no-changelog is set
  • Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, public corp docs)
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)
  • If this PR changes the public interface, I've notified @DataDog/apm-tees.

Reviewer Checklist

  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Description motivates each change
  • Avoids breaking API 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

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Apr 30, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-04-30 16:39:17

Comparing candidate commit d74522f in PR branch gnufede/macrobenchmarks with baseline commit 815da75 in branch main.

Found 5 performance improvements and 5 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 155 metrics, 9 unstable metrics.

scenario:httppropagationextract-wsgi_large_header_no_matches

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-784.253KB; -584.220KB] or [-3.676%; -2.739%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-wsgi_large_valid_headers_all

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+436.355KB; +696.598KB] or [+2.118%; +3.381%]

scenario:httppropagationextract-wsgi_medium_valid_headers_all

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+599.622KB; +759.022KB] or [+2.914%; +3.688%]

scenario:otelspan-start-finish

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+665.598KB; +738.102KB] or [+3.055%; +3.388%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-no-collectipvariant

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-951.485KB; -679.542KB] or [-4.423%; -3.159%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-no-query

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-949.418KB; -865.110KB] or [-4.395%; -4.005%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-send-querystring-disabled

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-945.279KB; -763.163KB] or [-4.335%; -3.500%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-obfuscation-worst-case-implicit-query

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-908.608KB; -830.553KB] or [-4.163%; -3.806%]

scenario:sethttpmeta-useragentvariant_not_exists_2

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+542.773KB; +615.986KB] or [+2.582%; +2.930%]

scenario:span-start-finish

  • 🟥 max_rss_usage [+576.317KB; +643.882KB] or [+2.773%; +3.099%]

@gnufede gnufede marked this pull request as ready for review April 30, 2024 16:24
@gnufede gnufede requested a review from a team as a code owner April 30, 2024 16:24
@gnufede gnufede added changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. CI labels Apr 30, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@erikayasuda erikayasuda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We were just talking about this on platform :) Exciting!!

@gnufede gnufede enabled auto-merge (squash) April 30, 2024 18:40
@gnufede gnufede merged commit d59d0f9 into main Apr 30, 2024
45 checks passed
@gnufede gnufede deleted the gnufede/macrobenchmarks branch April 30, 2024 18:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. CI
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants