-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Don't fail to build the agent locally when system probe is disabled #30901
Conversation
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 50044559 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests: Jobs:
If you modified Go files and expected unit tests to run in these jobs, please double check the job logs. If you think tests should have been executed reach out to #agent-devx-help |
@@ -91,15 +91,17 @@ | |||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/datadog.yaml.example", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent" | |||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/conf.d", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent", :force=>true | |||
unless heroku_target? | |||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/system-probe.yaml.example", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent" | |||
if ENV.has_key?('SYSTEM_PROBE_BIN') and not ENV['SYSTEM_PROBE_BIN'].empty? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Suggestion:
if ENV.has_key?('SYSTEM_PROBE_BIN') and not ENV['SYSTEM_PROBE_BIN'].empty? | |
if ENV.fetch("SYSTEM_PROBE_BIN", "").empty? |
Would it be worth turning this condition into a function?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As an aside, the conditionals on top of this (if linux_target?
and unless heroku_target?
seem to be yet another repetition of the condition that I referred to on the other review comment.
@@ -144,7 +144,8 @@ | |||
end | |||
|
|||
# System-probe | |||
sysprobe_support = (not heroku_target?) && (linux_target? || (windows_target? && do_windows_sysprobe != "")) | |||
sysprobe_support = (not heroku_target?) && (linux_target? || (windows_target? && do_windows_sysprobe != "")) && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not related to your change, but interestingly a similar condition is defined here:
if linux_target? && !heroku_target? |
Would it make sense to take this opportunity to refactor this by moving all the section under if sysprobe_support
to the system_probe
definition? That would drastically reduce the proliferation of these conditions that need to be repeated in several places.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That seems like a fair suggestion, I'll do the change :)
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 7e3f609 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | basic_py_check | % cpu utilization | +1.50 | [-2.34, +5.34] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.49 | [+0.35, +0.63] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.48 | [+0.41, +0.55] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.44 | [+0.35, +0.53] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.31 | [+0.26, +0.35] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.30 | [-0.43, +1.02] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.23 | [-0.47, +0.92] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.19 | [-0.44, +0.82] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.74, +0.81] | 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 | [-0.70, +0.69] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.83, +0.82] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.12, +0.10] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.09 | [-0.85, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.11 | [-0.58, +0.36] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | pycheck_lots_of_tags | % cpu utilization | -3.86 | [-7.22, -0.50] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | 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 | 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 |
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:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
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.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
e194084
to
86847a4
Compare
/gitlab estimate-cost |
Devflow running:
|
4a3dd37
to
f83ffc9
Compare
we only depend on system probe when it's enabled
1b7698b
to
d6d2f07
Compare
if sysprobe_enabled? | ||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/system-probe.yaml.example", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent" | ||
# SElinux policies aren't generated when system-probe isn't built | ||
# Move SELinux policy | ||
if debian_target? || redhat_target? | ||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/selinux", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/selinux" | ||
end | ||
end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it make sense to move this out of the nested conditionals? sysprobe_enabled
already implies linux_target and not heroku_target
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm a bit reluctant, as this block relies on the mkdir "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent"
just above, and the destination path are definitely linux specific.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I guess that's fair.
Co-authored-by: Alex Lopez <alex.lopez.zorzano@gmail.com>
if sysprobe_enabled? | ||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/system-probe.yaml.example", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent" | ||
# SElinux policies aren't generated when system-probe isn't built | ||
# Move SELinux policy | ||
if debian_target? || redhat_target? | ||
move "#{install_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/selinux", "#{output_config_dir}/etc/datadog-agent/selinux" | ||
end | ||
end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I guess that's fair.
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Disable system probe build throughout various locations to allow building the agent when
--system-probe-bin
isn't providedMotivation
Simplify building the agent locally
https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/BARX-622
Describe how to test/QA your changes
I'm not sure this is worth doing QA, but it can be verified manually by attempting to build the agent on
main
of before that commit is merged and confirm that if fails, and then with this commit and confirm that it doesn'tPossible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes