ci(pipeline_source): Adapt rules following update on scheduled pipelines #34244
Conversation
This file contains 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
chouetz
added
changelog/no-changelog
qa/no-code-change
Gitlab CI Configuration Changes
|
| Removed | Modified | Added | Renamed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 13 | 0 | 0 |
ℹ️ Diff available in the job log.
chouetz
force-pushed
the
nschweitzer/schedule_source
branch
from
cd16d70 to
91c7510
Compare
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
| @@ -3,8 +3,6 @@ cancel-prev-pipelines: | |||
| image: registry.ddbuild.io/ci/datadog-agent-buildimages/deb_x64$DATADOG_AGENT_BUILDIMAGES_SUFFIX:$DATADOG_AGENT_BUILDIMAGES | |||
| tags: ["arch:amd64"] | |||
| rules: # this should only run on dev branches | |||
| - if: $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE =~ /^schedule.*$/ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Release branches are excluded below so we don't need this condition
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
| - when: manual | ||
| allow_failure: true | ||
| - !reference [.on_scheduled_main] | ||
| - !reference [.manual] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the manual condition contains the MQ exclusion
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
| @@ -3,8 +3,6 @@ do-not-merge: | |||
| image: registry.ddbuild.io/ci/datadog-agent-buildimages/deb_x64$DATADOG_AGENT_BUILDIMAGES_SUFFIX:$DATADOG_AGENT_BUILDIMAGES | |||
| tags: ["arch:amd64"] | |||
| rules: # this should only run on dev branches | |||
| - if: $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE =~ /^schedule.*$/ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Release branches are excluded below so we don't need this condition
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
| - !reference [.except_mergequeue] | ||
| - !reference [.on_scheduled_main_or_manual] | ||
| - !reference [.on_scheduled_main] | ||
| - !reference [.manual] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the manual condition contains the MQ exclusion
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
| @@ -196,18 +196,6 @@ dev_nightly-ot-a7: | |||
| - IMG_SOURCES: ${SRC_AGENT}:v${CI_PIPELINE_ID}-${CI_COMMIT_SHORT_SHA}-7-ot-beta-jmx-amd64,${SRC_AGENT}:v${CI_PIPELINE_ID}-${CI_COMMIT_SHORT_SHA}-7-ot-beta-jmx-arm64 | |||
| IMG_DESTINATIONS: agent-dev:nightly-ot-beta-${CI_COMMIT_REF_SLUG}-jmx | |||
|
|
|||
| # deploy nightly build to single-machine-performance | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Discussed with SMP, this jobs is not needed anymore
|
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 56718454 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests: Jobs:
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-devx-help |
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Static quality checks ✅Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: dc5fc42 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +2.21 | [+1.28, +3.14] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.21 | [+0.16, +0.26] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.16 | [-0.61, +0.93] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.06 | [-0.00, +0.12] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.06 | [-0.41, +0.53] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.86, +0.89] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.64, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.02, +0.02] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.31, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.82, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.65, +0.61] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.82, +0.75] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.81, +0.73] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.14 | [-0.21, -0.08] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -0.29 | [-3.29, +2.70] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.52 | [-0.57, -0.47] | 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 | 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 | |
| ✅ | 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 intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, 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_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, 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.
chouetz
force-pushed
the
nschweitzer/schedule_source
branch
from
91c7510 to
ae1c822
Compare
chouetz
commented
Feb 20, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The notify_failure_summary
- uploads data for every push on main: it will change from push to api so we can exclude all other CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE
- publish daily/weekly results on the scheduled main.
Similarly, we close stale jira cards on the scheduled main branch.
There are sometimes several conductor executions on main per day, I think we can accept that.
jennchenn
approved these changes
Feb 20, 2025
CelianR
requested changes
Feb 20, 2025
Static quality checks ❌Please find below the results from static quality gates Error
Gate failure full details
Successful checksInfo
|
brycekahle
approved these changes
Feb 21, 2025
chouetz
force-pushed
the
nschweitzer/schedule_source
branch
from
d0f6bcd to
807b2c2
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
long review
chouetz
commented
Feb 24, 2025
tasks/notify.py
Outdated
| @@ -128,6 +128,14 @@ def failure_summary_send_notifications( | |||
| daily_summary or weekly_summary and not (daily_summary and weekly_summary) | |||
| ), "Exactly one of daily or weekly summary must be set" | |||
|
|
|||
| pipeline_start = datetime.fromisoformat(os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_CREATED_AT']) | |||
| if not (pipeline_start.hour == 6 and pipeline_start.minute < 30): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed with @FlorentClarret we set a 30min delay to catch "scheduled" pipeline from conductor. As the start time is really early in the morning this is safe enough to validate this is the scheduled pipeline.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, it doesn't feel really proper, could you isolate this into a tiny function? Maybe something like is_nightly_pipeline()
CelianR
approved these changes
Feb 24, 2025
tasks/notify.py
Outdated
| @@ -128,6 +128,14 @@ def failure_summary_send_notifications( | |||
| daily_summary or weekly_summary and not (daily_summary and weekly_summary) | |||
| ), "Exactly one of daily or weekly summary must be set" | |||
|
|
|||
| pipeline_start = datetime.fromisoformat(os.environ['CI_PIPELINE_CREATED_AT']) | |||
| if not (pipeline_start.hour == 6 and pipeline_start.minute < 30): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay, it doesn't feel really proper, could you isolate this into a tiny function? Maybe something like is_nightly_pipeline()
|
/merge |
|
View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.
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.
The median merge time in
|
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?
schedulepipeline_source for themainbranch as scheduled pipelines are now triggered by conductor.Motivation
As per
ddcimigration thepipeline_sourcewill change for pushes. I thus checked other usages of the pipeline source and detected these must be changedhttps://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/ACIX-534
Describe how you validated your changes
Bad configuration is handled by gitlab-ci tests + UT
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes