Turn tag/mapping conflict into an actual error.

[dplepage-dd]

What does this PR do?

In the case where a metric tag in a profile provides a mapping but not a tag, this now returns a validation error instead of simply logging a warning.

Motivation

Every other validation issue returns an error; this is the only case where we log a warning. Converting it to an error simplifies the handling logic and the tests, and makes it easier to sync profile logic with validation in #31054. Part of NDMII-3168.

Describe how you validated your changes

I ran the agent locally with a deliberately malformed profile and confirm that other profiles were loaded normally, and the malformed one was logged correctly. The malformed profile looked like:

sysobjectid:
  - 1.3.6.1.4.1.8072.3.2.10 # OID of snmpsim
metric_tags:
  - mapping:
      "1": "foo"
    oid: 1.3.6.1.4.1.8072.3.2.10 # OID doesn't matter, just needs to be present

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

If any customers have profiles where they have defined tags without setting the tag name, the agent will now log an error and ignore that profile instead of logging a warning and ignoring the malformed tags.

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=50232817 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit 9fd4957

[cit-pr-commenter]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: ec02f637-ab09-4cdc-af01-acfd17a68b23

Baseline: be4b703
Comparison: 9fd4957
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	+1.17	[+1.05, +1.29]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	pycheck_lots_of_tags	% cpu utilization	+0.60	[-2.98, +4.17]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.58	[-0.20, +1.35]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu	% cpu utilization	+0.54	[-0.20, +1.28]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	+0.31	[-2.71, +3.32]	1	Logs
➖	otel_to_otel_logs	ingress throughput	+0.22	[-0.41, +0.85]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.07	[-0.55, +0.70]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.05	[-0.73, +0.83]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.03	[-0.65, +0.70]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.07, +0.12]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.01, +0.01]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.12	[-0.89, +0.66]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	-0.13	[-0.28, +0.02]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load	egress throughput	-0.17	[-0.63, +0.29]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	-0.42	[-0.46, -0.37]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.46	[-0.53, -0.39]	1	Logs
➖	basic_py_check	% cpu utilization	-0.51	[-4.42, +3.40]	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_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:

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".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates 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.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[FlorianVeaux]

I'm ok with this change, the current situation creates confusion and the errors should show up in the agent status too. (Did you check this in the QA?)

[dplepage-dd]

/merge

[dd-devflow]

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

---

2024-12-10 18:12:51 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 24m.

[dplepage-dd]

Yes, I did confirm that this error appears in the agent status.