[AMLII-2183] Logs From Integrations Rotation E2E Test and Yaml Template #31812
Conversation
…liseth/integration-log-max-size-e2e-test
github-actions
bot
added
team/agent-metrics-logs
medium review
soberpeach
added
qa/no-code-change
|
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 51088196 (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 |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=51088196 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 5ca8269 |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: a2310cf Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.30 | [-1.67, +4.28] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +1.27 | [+1.15, +1.39] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.70 | [-0.01, +1.41] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.28 | [+0.16, +0.41] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.25 | [+0.20, +0.29] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.20 | [-0.57, +0.98] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.19 | [+0.12, +0.26] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.11 | [-0.65, +0.87] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.05 | [-0.67, +0.78] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.61, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.83, +0.85] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.09, +0.11] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.90, +0.89] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.86, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.12 | [-0.88, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.30 | [-0.76, +0.17] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
| ❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 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 | 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:
-
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_idle_all_features, 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, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Ensures all logs are read for logs from integrations after there are file rotations. By setting the maximum log file size to 1 megabyte and each log to 256 kilobytes, we can ensure that after five log writes there will be at least one rotation. Each log has a counter variable included that is incremented by 1 in each iteration. This count is checked on each iteration to ensure no logs are dropped.
It also adds a method to generate YAML check configs programmatically in the e2e test.
Motivation
E2E test coverage for logs from integrations.
Describe how to test/QA your changes
Make sure e2e tests pass.
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
N/A
Additional Notes
There will be more e2e tests written for this feature soon, including a test for multiple custom checks, and adding windows tests.