[Dynamic Instrumentation] Improved Go DI e2e tests #36790
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
GreenMatan
force-pushed
the
matang/boost-go-di-e2e-tests
branch
from
a2158de to
17ad730
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
the
short review
GreenMatan
changed the title
GreenMatan
changed the title
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
GreenMatan
force-pushed
the
matang/boost-go-di-e2e-tests
branch
from
17ad730 to
975a851
Compare
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 5917145 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | +3.56 | [-0.24, +7.35] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +2.94 | [+2.75, +3.14] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +1.39 | [+1.25, +1.53] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_logs | memory utilization | +0.47 | [+0.34, +0.61] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.29 | [+0.23, +0.35] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.28 | [+0.22, +0.35] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | docker_containers_memory | memory utilization | +0.22 | [+0.14, +0.31] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_logs | memory utilization | +0.06 | [-0.06, +0.18] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.05 | [-0.58, +0.69] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.63, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.64, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.22, +0.24] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.29, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.02, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.64, +0.61] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.69, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.71, +0.59] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.70, +0.55] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | -0.08 | [-0.16, +0.00] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics | memory utilization | -0.35 | [-0.47, -0.23] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.53 | [-1.38, +0.31] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_metrics | memory utilization | -0.62 | [-0.76, -0.47] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -2.01 | [-4.76, +0.75] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 9/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | docker_containers_cpu | simple_check_run | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | simple_check_run | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | 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 | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 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
❌ Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 9/10 replicas passed. Failed 1 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
|
grantseltzer
added
changelog/no-changelog
team/dynamic-instrumentation
|
@brycekahle simultaneously handled some of this in #36770, can you fix merge conflict and PR description accordingly? Otherwise looks good |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Go DI e2e tests make a heavy use on timers. There are a couple of drawbacks from using them:
This PR improves test robustness by:
With these changes, we were able to eliminate the use of arbitrary timers and gain a clearer, more deterministic picture of test behavior.
With these changes in place, the tests now run over twice as fast.
Motivation
Making DI's e2e tests faster and more reliable.
Describe how you validated your changes
Existing e2e tests: I compared the original Go DI E2E test results with the updated ones. The outcome remains the same, with test execution now more than twice as fast. Some test failures still exist, but they are unrelated to this PR and were present beforehand.