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

Migrate the winclang-format hook to invoke #26162

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 31, 2024

Conversation

FlorentClarret
Copy link
Member

@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret commented May 31, 2024

What does this PR do?

Migrate the winclang-format hook to invoke

Motivation

Same as:

Additional Notes

https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/ADXT-312

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Describe how to test/QA your changes

@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret changed the title Migrate the 'winclang-format' hook to invoke Migrate the winclang-format hook to invoke May 31, 2024
@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret added changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels May 31, 2024
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented May 31, 2024

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 35555676 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests:

Jobs:
  • tests_deb-arm64-py3
  • tests_deb-x64-py3
  • tests_flavor_dogstatsd_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_heroku_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_iot_deb-x64
  • tests_rpm-arm64-py3
  • tests_rpm-x64-py3
  • tests_windows-x64

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-developer-experience

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented May 31, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 19d969cf-539a-4d9e-a740-e663be9b63a7
Baseline: 06fb745
Comparison: 624395b

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +6.80 [-15.18, +28.77]
pycheck_1000_100byte_tags % cpu utilization +1.12 [-3.49, +5.74]
basic_py_check % cpu utilization +1.00 [-1.96, +3.96]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +0.63 [-2.37, +3.63]
idle memory utilization +0.11 [+0.07, +0.15]
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +0.04 [-0.33, +0.41]
trace_agent_json ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01]
trace_agent_msgpack ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.00, +0.00]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.01 [-0.21, +0.20]
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.03 [-0.08, +0.01]
file_tree memory utilization -0.85 [-0.96, -0.75]

Explanation

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:

  1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

  2. 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.

  3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret force-pushed the florentclarret/wincpp_hook branch from 07c3bfb to 624395b Compare May 31, 2024 09:56
@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret marked this pull request as ready for review May 31, 2024 09:59
@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret requested review from a team as code owners May 31, 2024 09:59
@FlorentClarret FlorentClarret added this to the 7.55.0 milestone May 31, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@amenasria amenasria left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM !

@FlorentClarret
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 31, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue

This merge request is not mergeable yet, because of pending checks/missing approvals. It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 31, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue

Pull request added to the queue.

This build is going to start soon! (estimated merge in less than 27m)

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 4b98a4f into main May 31, 2024
195 of 196 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the florentclarret/wincpp_hook branch May 31, 2024 13:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-developer-tools
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants