-
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
Lazy load rtloader when scheduling a python check #32611
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=52255612 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit ceb78bb |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: cc05710 Optimization Goals: ✅ Improvement(s) detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.14 | [-0.68, +0.95] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.05 | [-0.83, +0.93] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.83, +0.91] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.63, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.12, +0.12] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.73, +0.66] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.15 | [-0.93, +0.64] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.15 | [-0.61, +0.32] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.17 | [-0.83, +0.50] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.22 | [-1.00, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.56 | [-0.63, -0.50] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -2.98 | [-6.14, +0.18] | 1 | Logs |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -7.66 | [-7.75, -7.57] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | file_tree | memory utilization | -8.36 | [-8.49, -8.22] | 1 | Logs |
✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -15.31 | [-15.35, -15.27] | 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_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | 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 |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
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_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate 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.
What does this PR do?
Initialize Python and rtloader when a first Python check is scheduled.
Motivation
Should reduce idle RSS.
Describe how you validated your changes
TBD.
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
This only makes sense if the Go check loader has precedence over the Python check loader (which is not the case right now, the PR changes it).
Additional Notes
This is just an experiment to compare with #31571 which adds actual process instead.
This is not the preferred path forward, so no need to take this too seriously.