-
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
[CWS] fix docker image parsing in ptracer #31400
[CWS] fix docker image parsing in ptracer #31400
Conversation
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 49777350 (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 |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv create-vm --pipeline-id=49777350 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit a6bde13 |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: c33fab7 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | pycheck_lots_of_tags | % cpu utilization | +1.63 | [-1.84, +5.10] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.86 | [+0.79, +0.93] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | basic_py_check | % cpu utilization | +0.57 | [-3.32, +4.46] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.09 | [-0.57, +0.76] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.06 | [-0.06, +0.19] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.02] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.72, +0.72] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.13, +0.10] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.89, +0.84] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.65, +0.59] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.12 | [-0.90, +0.66] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.35 | [-1.13, +0.44] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.37 | [-0.83, +0.08] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.44 | [-1.16, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.51 | [-0.55, -0.46] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -1.53 | [-1.69, -1.37] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
✅ | 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 | lost_bytes | 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.
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
The current code does not handle
sha
digest in image name, and is not really tested. This PR switches to the common agent function to parse the image name, this one is tested and is used in the workloadmeta store so we ensure we stay in sync compared to the rest of the agent.Motivation
Describe how to test/QA your changes
Deploy on fargate, collect events, look at the tags and check the image name and tag tags. Try it with image:
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes