[CONTP-567] Base impl static tag migration #32833
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
long review
Go Package Import DifferencesBaseline: 17111e2
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 17111e2 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.32 | [-1.91, +4.55] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.35 | [-0.43, +1.14] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.23 | [+0.20, +0.27] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.17 | [+0.08, +0.26] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.07 | [-0.78, +0.91] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.06 | [-0.66, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.10, +0.11] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.90, +0.86] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.66, +0.62] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.90, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.86, +0.71] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.13 | [-0.60, +0.33] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.17 | [-0.31, -0.04] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -1.28 | [-1.99, -0.57] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -1.36 | [-1.42, -1.29] | 1 | Logs |
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_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.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
gabedos
force-pushed
the
gabedos/utilize-tagger-for-global-tags
branch
from
22e1e1c to
379584b
Compare
gabedos
force-pushed
the
gabedos/utilize-tagger-for-global-tags
branch
from
379584b to
89c1a19
Compare
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
gabedos
added
changelog/no-changelog
qa/done
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=52723889 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 8530b0e |
gabedos
force-pushed
the
gabedos/utilize-tagger-for-global-tags
branch
from
3a5cd20 to
44e8a48
Compare
gabedos
force-pushed
the
gabedos/utilize-tagger-for-global-tags
branch
from
44e8a48 to
8530b0e
Compare
Serverless Benchmark Results
tl;drUse these benchmarks as an insight tool during development.
What is this benchmarking?The The benchmark is run using a large variety of lambda request payloads. In the charts below, there is one row for each event payload type. How do I interpret these charts?The charts below comes from The benchstat docs explain how to interpret these charts.
I need more helpFirst off, do not worry if the benchmarks are failing. They are not tests. The intention is for them to be a tool for you to use during development. If you would like a hand interpreting the results come chat with us in Benchmark stats |
What does this PR do?
Migrates static tag logic inside of the Tagger.
Motivation
Simpler interface for retrieving static global tags.
Describe how you validated your changes
Unit tests show that global tags are still being acquired properly in updated components.
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes