Create an "installer" executable for use with the Datadog installer #6643

andrewlock · 2025-02-10T11:46:20Z

Summary of changes

Creates an "installer" executable, designed to be executed by the fleet installer as part of configuring Windows SSI.

Reason for change

We don't want to use the existing MSI, primarily because it requires stopping and starting IIS when you update it, otherwise we risk causing crashes.

The datadog-installer is responsible for copying the files added to the Windows OCI image, and running the Datadog.FleetInstaller.exe executable to configure the application. Similarly, it calls this exe when uninstalling a tracer version or removing the product

Implementation details

Uses the fusion.dll API directly to manage the GAC entries, based on the generated PInvoke APIs defined here
Sets the envivornment variables by setting the environmentVariables section in applicationHost.config. Uses the Microsoft.Web.Administration NuGet to interact with the native API.

Test coverage

Manually tested. Subsequent PRs in the stack will add smoke and integration tests.

Other details

Explicitly designed to run on Windows Server 2016+, so targets .NET FX for simplicity. The Microsoft.Web.Administration nuget is a .NET Standard 1.x dll, which creates an annoying number of dlls in the output, but it's just ugly, it works fine.

There's a fair amount of duplication in the Fusion API/Microsoft.Web.Administration code with what the dd-dotnet/dd-trace tool currently does. We could certainly look at consolidating that down the line, and potentially rewriting the fleet installer tool to be a NativeAOT executable, but it's probably not worth the effort at this point.

The explicit <RuntimeIdentifier>win-x64</RuntimeIdentifier> in the .csproj is an odd one. Without it, for some reason, the gitlab build restores for x86 but tries to build for x64 which is... weird. Also, can't repro the issue locally. Really don't understand what's happening there, but this works so... 🙈

Part of a stack of PRs:

datadog-ddstaging · 2025-02-10T13:27:14Z

Datadog Report

Branch report: andrew/win-ssi/1-poc
Commit report: 16cda8e
Test service: dd-trace-dotnet

✅ 0 Failed, 241328 Passed, 2373 Skipped, 18h 16m 9.47s Total Time

andrewlock · 2025-02-10T14:01:13Z

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing the following branches/commits:

Execution-time benchmarks measure the whole time it takes to execute a program. And are intended to measure the one-off costs. Cases where the execution time results for the PR are worse than latest master results are shown in red. The following thresholds were used for comparing the execution times:

Welch test with statistical test for significance of 5%
Only results indicating a difference greater than 5% and 5 ms are considered.

Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see the dashboard.

Graphs show the p99 interval based on the mean and StdDev of the test run, as well as the mean value of the run (shown as a diamond below the graph).

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (69ms)  : 66, 71
     .   : milestone, 69,
    master - mean (69ms)  : 66, 71
     .   : milestone, 69,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (993ms)  : 970, 1016
     .   : milestone, 993,
    master - mean (997ms)  : 975, 1018
     .   : milestone, 997,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (102ms)  : 100, 104
     .   : milestone, 102,
    master - mean (102ms)  : 100, 104
     .   : milestone, 102,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (670ms)  : 648, 691
     .   : milestone, 670,
    master - mean (674ms)  : 658, 690
     .   : milestone, 674,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (90ms)  : 88, 91
     .   : milestone, 90,
    master - mean (89ms)  : 87, 92
     .   : milestone, 89,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (630ms)  : 615, 646
     .   : milestone, 630,
    master - mean (633ms)  : 618, 647
     .   : milestone, 633,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (191ms)  : 185, 197
     .   : milestone, 191,
    master - mean (191ms)  : 186, 196
     .   : milestone, 191,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (1,102ms)  : 1070, 1133
     .   : milestone, 1102,
    master - mean (1,105ms)  : 1078, 1133
     .   : milestone, 1105,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (270ms)  : 266, 274
     .   : milestone, 270,
    master - mean (271ms)  : 266, 275
     .   : milestone, 271,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (862ms)  : 831, 894
     .   : milestone, 862,
    master - mean (871ms)  : 829, 913
     .   : milestone, 871,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6643) - mean (262ms)  : 257, 266
     .   : milestone, 262,
    master - mean (263ms)  : 259, 266
     .   : milestone, 263,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6643) - mean (845ms)  : 817, 872
     .   : milestone, 845,
    master - mean (853ms)  : 813, 893
     .   : milestone, 853,

andrewlock · 2025-02-10T22:01:19Z

Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌

Benchmarks for #6643 compared to master:

3 benchmarks are faster, with geometric mean 1.142
2 benchmarks are slower, with geometric mean 1.139
All benchmarks have the same allocations

The following thresholds were used for comparing the benchmark speeds:

Mann–Whitney U test with statistical test for significance of 5%
Only results indicating a difference greater than 10% and 0.3 ns are considered.

Allocation changes below 0.5% are ignored.

Benchmark details

Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
master	`StartStopWithChild`	net6.0	7.95μs	44ns	268ns	0.0325	0.0163	0	5.61 KB
master	`StartStopWithChild`	netcoreapp3.1	9.9μs	52.4ns	262ns	0.0202	0.0101	0	5.8 KB
master	`StartStopWithChild`	net472	16.1μs	39.8ns	154ns	1.05	0.329	0.104	6.21 KB
#6643	`StartStopWithChild`	net6.0	7.82μs	44.9ns	336ns	0.0154	0.00771	0	5.61 KB
#6643	`StartStopWithChild`	netcoreapp3.1	10.1μs	56.8ns	372ns	0.0146	0.00487	0	5.81 KB
#6643	`StartStopWithChild`	net472	16μs	59.6ns	231ns	1.04	0.321	0.102	6.2 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	476μs	248ns	928ns	0	2.7 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	666μs	463ns	1.79μs	0	2.7 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	854μs	551ns	2.13μs	0.425	3.3 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	486μs	246ns	887ns	0	2.7 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	695μs	466ns	1.68μs	0	2.7 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	847μs	591ns	2.29μs	0.417	3.3 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendRequest`	net6.0	132μs	334ns	1.3μs	0.196	14.47 KB
master	`SendRequest`	netcoreapp3.1	149μs	286ns	1.11μs	0.149	17.27 KB
master	`SendRequest`	net472	0.00159ns	0.000562ns	0.00218ns	0	0 b
#6643	`SendRequest`	net6.0	135μs	465ns	1.8μs	0.135	14.47 KB
#6643	`SendRequest`	netcoreapp3.1	148μs	242ns	937ns	0.221	17.27 KB
#6643	`SendRequest`	net472	0.000544ns	0.000212ns	0.000793ns	0	0 b

Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	573μs	2.93μs	13.1μs	0.288	0	0	41.74 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	709μs	4.13μs	35.3μs	0.334	0	0	41.87 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	846μs	3.56μs	13.8μs	8.45	2.53	0.422	53.35 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	580μs	2.94μs	14.4μs	0.576	0	0	41.53 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	697μs	3.94μs	29μs	0.331	0	0	41.81 KB
#6643	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	840μs	2.67μs	10.4μs	8.69	2.48	0.414	53.35 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.DbCommandBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Allocated
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net6.0	1.25μs	1.55ns	6.01ns	0.0145	0	1.02 KB
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	netcoreapp3.1	1.85μs	2.56ns	9.93ns	0.0139	0	1.02 KB
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net472	2.1μs	2.83ns	11ns	0.157	0.00104	987 B
#6643	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net6.0	1.35μs	1.34ns	5.02ns	0.0145	0	1.02 KB
#6643	`ExecuteNonQuery`	netcoreapp3.1	1.7μs	1.13ns	4.07ns	0.0136	0	1.02 KB
#6643	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net472	2.13μs	2.83ns	11ns	0.157	0.00107	987 B

Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`CallElasticsearch`	net6.0	1.28μs	0.79ns	2.95ns	0.0136	976 B
master	`CallElasticsearch`	netcoreapp3.1	1.48μs	0.459ns	1.72ns	0.0133	976 B
master	`CallElasticsearch`	net472	2.56μs	1.95ns	7.56ns	0.158	995 B
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net6.0	1.26μs	0.441ns	1.65ns	0.0133	952 B
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.74μs	0.697ns	2.61ns	0.0139	1.02 KB
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net472	2.74μs	1.55ns	5.99ns	0.167	1.05 KB
#6643	`CallElasticsearch`	net6.0	1.32μs	0.568ns	2.2ns	0.0138	976 B
#6643	`CallElasticsearch`	netcoreapp3.1	1.58μs	1.17ns	4.39ns	0.0134	976 B
#6643	`CallElasticsearch`	net472	2.6μs	2.72ns	10.5ns	0.157	995 B
#6643	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net6.0	1.29μs	0.45ns	1.74ns	0.013	952 B
#6643	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.72μs	0.689ns	2.58ns	0.0137	1.02 KB
#6643	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net472	2.76μs	1.23ns	4.75ns	0.166	1.05 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`ExecuteAsync`	net6.0	1.35μs	0.803ns	2.9ns	0.013	952 B
master	`ExecuteAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.68μs	0.734ns	2.84ns	0.0126	952 B
master	`ExecuteAsync`	net472	1.85μs	0.692ns	2.59ns	0.145	915 B
#6643	`ExecuteAsync`	net6.0	1.37μs	0.351ns	1.31ns	0.0132	952 B
#6643	`ExecuteAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.63μs	0.671ns	2.42ns	0.013	952 B
#6643	`ExecuteAsync`	net472	1.82μs	0.863ns	3.34ns	0.145	915 B

Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendAsync`	net6.0	4.3μs	0.942ns	3.4ns	0.0322	2.31 KB
master	`SendAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	5.32μs	2.31ns	8.93ns	0.0372	2.85 KB
master	`SendAsync`	net472	7.41μs	1.74ns	6.53ns	0.496	3.12 KB
#6643	`SendAsync`	net6.0	4.53μs	1.96ns	7.33ns	0.0318	2.31 KB
#6643	`SendAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	5.22μs	1.31ns	4.52ns	0.0369	2.85 KB
#6643	`SendAsync`	net472	7.32μs	2.54ns	9.84ns	0.495	3.12 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark - Slower ⚠️ Same allocations ✔️

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Benchmark	diff/base	Base Median (ns)	Diff Median (ns)	Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog‑net472	1.123	2,408.77	2,704.77

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	1.48μs	0.657ns	2.46ns	0.023	1.64 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	2.18μs	1.01ns	3.79ns	0.0218	1.64 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	2.41μs	0.67ns	2.41ns	0.249	1.57 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	1.48μs	1.88ns	6.79ns	0.0228	1.64 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	2.18μs	0.608ns	2.19ns	0.0219	1.64 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net472	2.71μs	2.24ns	8.08ns	0.249	1.57 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	112μs	97.9ns	379ns	0	0	4.28 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	117μs	216ns	837ns	0.0586	0	4.28 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	150μs	86.7ns	324ns	0.674	0.225	4.46 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	112μs	138ns	534ns	0.0559	0	4.28 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	117μs	275ns	1.07μs	0	0	4.28 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net472	151μs	154ns	597ns	0.673	0.224	4.46 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.NLogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.94μs	0.786ns	3.05ns	0.031	2.2 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	4.1μs	1.96ns	7.34ns	0.0288	2.2 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.92μs	0.984ns	3.68ns	0.321	2.02 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.98μs	0.853ns	3.08ns	0.0312	2.2 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	4.27μs	1.19ns	4.44ns	0.028	2.2 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.82μs	1.46ns	5.66ns	0.32	2.02 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendReceive`	net6.0	1.35μs	0.852ns	3.3ns	0.0162	1.14 KB
master	`SendReceive`	netcoreapp3.1	1.78μs	0.645ns	2.5ns	0.015	1.14 KB
master	`SendReceive`	net472	2.14μs	1.51ns	5.43ns	0.183	1.16 KB
#6643	`SendReceive`	net6.0	1.25μs	0.75ns	2.91ns	0.0162	1.14 KB
#6643	`SendReceive`	netcoreapp3.1	1.8μs	1.12ns	4.35ns	0.0153	1.14 KB
#6643	`SendReceive`	net472	2.07μs	4.02ns	15.6ns	0.184	1.16 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.81μs	0.819ns	3.07ns	0.0224	1.6 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	3.9μs	1.5ns	5.6ns	0.0215	1.65 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.49μs	3.72ns	14.4ns	0.323	2.04 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.69μs	0.737ns	2.66ns	0.0217	1.6 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	3.98μs	3.3ns	12.3ns	0.022	1.65 KB
#6643	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.6μs	4.08ns	15.3ns	0.322	2.04 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark - Slower ⚠️ Same allocations ✔️

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Benchmark	diff/base	Base Median (ns)	Diff Median (ns)	Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan‑netcoreapp3.1	1.156	552.32	638.36

Faster 🎉 in #6643

Benchmark	base/diff	Base Median (ns)	Diff Median (ns)
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan‑net6.0	1.165	461.61	396.06
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope‑net472	1.148	889.15	774.68
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope‑net6.0	1.115	540.73	485.13

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`StartFinishSpan`	net6.0	463ns	0.636ns	2.46ns	0.00808	576 B
master	`StartFinishSpan`	netcoreapp3.1	553ns	0.772ns	2.99ns	0.00779	576 B
master	`StartFinishSpan`	net472	609ns	1.24ns	4.78ns	0.0916	578 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	net6.0	540ns	0.8ns	3.1ns	0.00978	696 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	netcoreapp3.1	738ns	0.965ns	3.74ns	0.00938	696 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	net472	888ns	1.47ns	5.7ns	0.104	658 B
#6643	`StartFinishSpan`	net6.0	395ns	0.629ns	2.43ns	0.00813	576 B
#6643	`StartFinishSpan`	netcoreapp3.1	637ns	0.734ns	2.84ns	0.00795	576 B
#6643	`StartFinishSpan`	net472	586ns	2.22ns	8.58ns	0.0917	578 B
#6643	`StartFinishScope`	net6.0	484ns	0.978ns	3.79ns	0.0097	696 B
#6643	`StartFinishScope`	netcoreapp3.1	687ns	1.96ns	7.61ns	0.00931	696 B
#6643	`StartFinishScope`	net472	774ns	1.04ns	4.01ns	0.104	658 B

Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net6.0	657ns	0.752ns	2.91ns	0.00979	696 B
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	netcoreapp3.1	956ns	1.04ns	4.02ns	0.00917	696 B
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net472	1.1μs	1.64ns	6.34ns	0.104	658 B
#6643	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net6.0	626ns	0.685ns	2.65ns	0.00987	696 B
#6643	`RunOnMethodBegin`	netcoreapp3.1	872ns	1.77ns	6.84ns	0.00931	696 B
#6643	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net472	1.06μs	1.86ns	7.22ns	0.104	658 B

lucaspimentel · 2025-02-11T18:05:10Z

Datadog.Trace.sln

@@ -603,6 +603,8 @@ Project("{FAE04EC0-301F-11D3-BF4B-00C04F79EFBC}") = "Samples.AzureFunctions.V4Is
 EndProject
 Project("{FAE04EC0-301F-11D3-BF4B-00C04F79EFBC}") = "Samples.AzureFunctions.V4Isolated.AspNetCore", "tracer\test\test-applications\azure-functions\Samples.AzureFunctions.V4Isolated.AspNetCore\Samples.AzureFunctions.V4Isolated.AspNetCore.csproj", "{0F8EAB52-0C5B-4F60-92C5-42FAC21F4E77}"
 EndProject
+Project("{FAE04EC0-301F-11D3-BF4B-00C04F79EFBC}") = "Datadog.FleetInstaller", "tracer\src\Datadog.FleetInstaller\Datadog.FleetInstaller.csproj", "{47C1970A-0098-45A2-9D65-7790607D9A68}"


Adding even more projects to the solution that don't really need to be there makes me sad 😔

Adding even more projects to the solution that don't really need to be there makes me sad 😔

It depends on your definition of "need", surely? 😅 I don't need half of the projects in the sln day-to-day 😅 What is the sln for anymore? I'm only half joking tbh, seeing as we don't (and can't) do a simple dotnet build on it, is there any point in it?

More importantly, if I don't add this to the solution even if I don't explicitly try to build it, then it breaks the build 😩 Because of horrible NuGet restore reasons.

FWIW, I initially had this in /shared next to the MSI, but given I want to use our existing test projects in the tracer to unit/integration test this (in a subsequent PR), I moved it here as this seemed like the correct place, and at that point I had to add it to the sln 🤷‍♂️

Because of horrible NuGet restore reasons

Right. I always forget this.

I have my own tiny sln for everyday work now so I don't know why I care about Datadog.Trace.sln anymore 😝

... although, restoring everything does make nuke builds slower. We should consider having some things in their own standalone sln. Definitely not blocking here.

lucaspimentel · 2025-02-11T18:25:21Z

tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/ReturnCode.cs

+    // The order of these values is important, as they are used to determine the exit code of the process
+    // We should always add new error values to the end and not re-order them


Given this comment, should we given them explicit values?

🤷‍♂️ That was my initial thought, but I've seen more cases of that causing copy-pasta duplication errors than actually avoiding it personally 😄 Happy to if you have feelings stronger than my "mild disinclination" 😅

Level of care low. The comment is probably good enough.

lucaspimentel · 2025-02-11T18:26:04Z

tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/TracerValues.cs

+        FilesToAddToGac =
+        [
+            Path.Combine(tracerHomeDirectory, "net461", "Datadog.Trace.dll"),
+            Path.Combine(tracerHomeDirectory, "net461", "Datadog.Trace.MSBuild.dll"),


Is SSI supported for CI Visibility?

Not explicitly, but omitting this seemed likely to cause confusion down the line without any real benefit.

lucaspimentel

Nice!

tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/AppHostHelper.cs

tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/Commands/InstallCommand.cs

# Conflicts: # tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/.editorconfig # tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/Directory.Build.props

…ry, given we have the dll path

…w why it's necessary

…6644) ## Summary of changes - Build the fleet installer exe in GitLab - Include the fleet installer exe in Windows OCI - Produce Windows OCI images in Staging ## Reason for change We need to build the fleet installer executable, and include it in a Windows OI image ## Implementation details - Add a stage `BuildFleetInstaller` to explicitly publish the fleet installer - Update the `download-single-step-artifacts` to grab the `windows-tracer-home.zip` and fleet installer artifact from the `Build` stage - Update the OCI image For tagged releases this flow is a bit more convoluted. We need to grab the fleet-instller.exe artifact from the s3 upload that's done in the `publish` step, because we don't store it on the GitHub release. It's a bit ugly, but it works. ## Test coverage This is the test - if it builds, and the OCI image contains the expected files, we're good ## Other details Note that _currently_, the final OCI images will _not_ contain Windows layers, until we unblock that both in our gitlab YAML, and in the libdatadog-build one pipeline. Part of a stack of PRs: - #6643 - #6644 👈 - #6645

## Summary of changes Adds a new smoke test stage, for running inside Windows using the fleet installer ## Reason for change Emulates an end-to-end smoke test for the fleet installer executable. ## Implementation details - Build the fleet installer in the AzDo pipeline, as part of the `package-windows` stage - Adds a new `fleet_installer_smoke_tests` stage for running the smoke tests - Fix issues in ASP.NET Core test app, so that it works when hosted in IIS - Add a dockerfile for running the ASP.NET Core app with the fleet installer, hosted in IIS That latter point proved to be somewhat of a nightmare. The resulting dockerfile feels kind of horrible, but I couldn't find another way to have: - Delay the start of the app pool until the container image is running (i.e. not during build time) - Start the worker process when the app pool starts, _without_ an incoming request - Shut down the app pool when the worker process exits (which is the way the aspnetcore app works) - Exit the container The workaround, using the entrypoint script, makes a 404 request to the app to spin up the worker process, manually shuts down the app pool (to make sure the app definitely shuts down and flushes), and then exits. This causes an additional span in the traces, so needed to create new snapshots. ## Test coverage This gives basic snapshot testing on 2022 which is the only version I could get to work given the hosted images on AzDo and the available python base images for the test agent. I think that is sufficient - we are going to have additional end-to-end testing of Windows images in system tests anyway. ## Other details Part of a stack of PRs: - #6643 - #6644 - #6645 👈

andrewlock added the area:ssi label Feb 10, 2025

andrewlock requested review from a team as code owners February 10, 2025 11:46

andrewlock force-pushed the andrew/win-ssi/1-poc branch from 64a4c7b to 29a2ff8 Compare February 10, 2025 11:47

This was referenced Feb 10, 2025

Build the FleetInstaller executable and include in Windows OCI image #6644

Merged

Add smoke tests for fleet installer #6645

Merged

andrewlock force-pushed the andrew/win-ssi/1-poc branch from 9ea0872 to 16cda8e Compare February 11, 2025 10:10

lucaspimentel reviewed Feb 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

lucaspimentel approved these changes Feb 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

lucaspimentel requested a review from a team February 11, 2025 18:29

lucaspimentel added the area:installers label Feb 11, 2025

kevingosse approved these changes Feb 11, 2025

View reviewed changes

andrewlock added 13 commits February 12, 2025 12:36

Initial PoC

b0b59d5

Add build files to handle that we're in the Shared folder

9086ede

# Conflicts: # tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/.editorconfig # tracer/src/Datadog.FleetInstaller/Directory.Build.props

Remove the duplicate properties

a84aa45

Remove symlink approach

1792716

Ensure you're running as an administrator

bcb7d60

Delete the native loader files as part of uninstalling a version

a707ea6

Restructure commands

9052fb9

Don't use the version in the gac uninstall command - it's not necessa…

282af51

…ry, given we have the dll path

Remove unnecessary conditionals

569c9ad

Add fleet installer to solution

e81fd31

Let's try a RuntimeIdentifierto fix the gitlab build. No, I don't kno…

b3946c3

…w why it's necessary

Fix log messages

4bd714a

Add guard rail to ensure we don't try to install on < IIS 10

d77915f

andrewlock force-pushed the andrew/win-ssi/1-poc branch from 16cda8e to d77915f Compare February 12, 2025 12:38

andrewlock merged commit 0252136 into master Feb 12, 2025
139 of 141 checks passed

andrewlock deleted the andrew/win-ssi/1-poc branch February 12, 2025 15:30

github-actions bot added this to the vNext-v3 milestone Feb 12, 2025

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Create an "installer" executable for use with the Datadog installer #6643

Create an "installer" executable for use with the Datadog installer #6643

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

datadog-ddstaging bot commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Faster 🎉 in #6643

Raw results

Raw results

lucaspimentel Feb 11, 2025

andrewlock Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel Feb 11, 2025

andrewlock Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel Feb 11, 2025

andrewlock Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel Feb 12, 2025

lucaspimentel left a comment

		// The order of these values is important, as they are used to determine the exit code of the process
		// We should always add new error values to the end and not re-order them

Create an "installer" executable for use with the Datadog installer #6643

Create an "installer" executable for use with the Datadog installer #6643

Conversation

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Summary of changes

Reason for change

Implementation details

Test coverage

Other details

datadog-ddstaging bot commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Datadog Report

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌

Benchmark details

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Slower ⚠️ in #6643

Faster 🎉 in #6643

Raw results

Raw results

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

lucaspimentel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

datadog-ddstaging bot commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading