Add separators for large numbers #35100
Open
+10
−33
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
ajgajg1134
added
changelog/no-changelog
team/agent-apm
ekump
approved these changes
Mar 13, 2025
truthbk
approved these changes
Mar 13, 2025
| @@ -393,26 +393,3 @@ func GetTestSpan() *pb.Span { | |||
| traceutil.ComputeTopLevel(trace) | |||
| return trace[0] | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // TestSpan returns a fix span with hardcoded info, useful for reproducible tests | |||
| func TestSpan() *pb.Span { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any reason to remove this? Unused?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah I'll update the description - yeah in modifying this code I noticed that this function was unused so removed it.
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: dda inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=58751173 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 7fc73a0 |
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: 0bf3ea9 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +1.41 | [+0.57, +2.25] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.60, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.75, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.63, +0.67] | 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 | [-0.29, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.83, +0.74] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.90, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.96, +0.86] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.12 | [-0.59, +0.35] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.28 | [-0.35, -0.21] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.30 | [-1.08, +0.48] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.38 | [-0.44, -0.32] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.58 | [-0.64, -0.52] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | -0.70 | [-0.75, -0.66] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -1.04 | [-3.86, +1.77] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -3.05 | [-3.24, -2.87] | 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_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_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 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.
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?
Add separators to a variety of large int literals that we own.
While making the change I happened to run into some dead code in testutils and so removed
TestSpan()Motivation
Separators improve human readability. We have previously missed changes to literals like these that resulted in breaking changes, with improved readability human reviewers are more likely to see when a value changes, especially for large numbers like
1000000(e.g. can you at a glance tell what that number is? I know I certainly can't. Is it the same as100000?)Describe how you validated your changes
I added a custom Datadog Code Security rule that looks for these and suggests fixes. On making these changes I ensured that the values stayed the same. Unit tests and visual verification should be sufficient here.
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Maybe someone out there doesn't like these separators?
Additional Notes