Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[netpath] Add windows e2e tests for network path integration #32006

Open
wants to merge 19 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

AlexandreYang
Copy link
Member

@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang commented Dec 11, 2024

What does this PR do?

[netpath] Add windows e2e tests for network path integration

Motivation

better coverage

Describe how you validated your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@github-actions github-actions bot added short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/networks team/network-device-monitoring labels Dec 11, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added medium review PR review might take time and removed short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly labels Dec 11, 2024
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Dec 11, 2024

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 50858432 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests:

Jobs:
  • tests_deb-arm64-py3
  • tests_deb-x64-py3
  • tests_flavor_dogstatsd_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_heroku_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_iot_deb-x64
  • tests_rpm-arm64-py3
  • tests_rpm-x64-py3
  • tests_windows-x64

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

Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Dec 11, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: a87990a5-2669-4b73-a656-93451ce0b26e

Baseline: d241887
Comparison: 918d1d8
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +1.14 [+0.44, +1.83] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.82 [+0.71, +0.94] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput +0.32 [-0.16, +0.79] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.17 [-0.60, +0.93] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.16 [-0.63, +0.94] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization +0.05 [-0.06, +0.17] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput +0.02 [-0.79, +0.83] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.70, +0.74] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.10, +0.10] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.01 [-0.64, +0.62] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.02 [-0.86, +0.83] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.06 [-0.84, +0.72] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.29 [-0.34, -0.25] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.86 [-0.92, -0.80] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -1.17 [-1.90, -0.44] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -1.35 [-4.27, +1.57] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency lost_bytes 9/10
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency lost_bytes 9/10
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 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 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_all_features, 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_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang added changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Dec 11, 2024
@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang changed the title [netpath] Refactor e2e tests [netpath] Add windows e2e tests Dec 11, 2024
@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang changed the title [netpath] Add windows e2e tests [netpath] Add windows e2e tests for network path integration Dec 11, 2024
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Dec 11, 2024

Test changes on VM

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

inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=50858432 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit 114ee23

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Dec 11, 2024

Package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor 97fdc4dd76a239705a17f1d71b73eb43681f2304

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 1271.59MB 1271.59MB 140.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 113.29MB 113.29MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 78.41MB 78.41MB 10.00MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 526.66MB 526.66MB 70.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 1280.83MB 1280.83MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 1280.83MB 1280.83MB 140.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 113.36MB 113.36MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 113.36MB 113.36MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 78.49MB 78.49MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 78.49MB 78.49MB 10.00MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 1005.67MB 1005.67MB 140.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 108.77MB 108.77MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB 55.65MB 55.65MB 10.00MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 1014.89MB 1014.89MB 140.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 108.84MB 108.84MB 10.00MB

Decision

✅ Passed

@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang marked this pull request as ready for review December 11, 2024 18:38
@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang requested review from a team as code owners December 11, 2024 18:38
@AlexandreYang AlexandreYang requested a review from mbakht December 11, 2024 18:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog medium review PR review might take time qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/network-device-monitoring team/networks
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant