Skip to content

[Backport 7.81.x] Prefer DNS endpoint in CI for mirrored Go packages#52696

Closed
dd-octo-sts[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
7.81.xfrom
backport-52499-to-7.81.x
Closed

[Backport 7.81.x] Prefer DNS endpoint in CI for mirrored Go packages#52696
dd-octo-sts[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
7.81.xfrom
backport-52499-to-7.81.x

Conversation

@dd-octo-sts

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Backport ceea175 from #52499.


Motivation

Service-to-service traffic is supposed to use internal DNS instead of the currently-prioritized gateway proxy, which intermittently throws 503s even though the underlying service is healthy.

Additional Notes

CI will pass when the build images have been updated, as seen here #52547

…ation

Service-to-service traffic is supposed to use internal DNS instead of the currently-prioritized gateway proxy, which intermittently throws 503s even though the underlying service is healthy.

### Additional Notes

CI will pass when the build images have been updated, as seen here #52547

Co-authored-by: ofek.lev <ofek.lev@datadoghq.com>
(cherry picked from commit ceea175)

___

Co-authored-by: Ofek Lev <ofekmeister@gmail.com>
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added backport bot changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Jun 24, 2026
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot requested a review from a team as a code owner June 24, 2026 08:00
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot requested review from a team as code owners June 24, 2026 08:00
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot requested review from RiantZ and rahulkaukuntla and removed request for a team June 24, 2026 08:00
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Gitlab CI Configuration Changes

⚠️ Diff too large to display on Github.

Changes Summary

Removed Modified Added Renamed
0 161 2 0

ℹ️ Diff available in the job log.

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 74769ca5:

Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~rc.3.git.6.2d7df5e.pipeline.120679374-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

cit-pr-commenter-54b7da Bot commented Jun 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 7abe2488-a6c8-4e29-afce-840f39da9b8f

Baseline: 74769ca
Comparison: 2d7df5e
Diff

❌ Experiments with retried target crashes

This is a critical error. One or more replicates failed with a non-zero exit code. These replicates may have been retried. See Replicate Execution Details for more information.

  • quality_gate_idle

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_logs % cpu utilization +1.18 [+0.10, +2.27] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.52 [+0.26, +0.78] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.36 [+0.33, +0.40] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.14 [+0.09, +0.19] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 9/10 147.09MiB > 147MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 577.47KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 483.84MiB ≤ 495MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features total_bytes_received 10/10 0.89MiB ≤ 1.25MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 182.06MiB ≤ 195MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 264.32MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 328.48 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 395.84MiB ≤ 430MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 0.87GiB ≤ 1.04GiB bounds checks dashboard

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".

Replicate Execution Details

We run multiple replicates for each experiment/variant. However, we allow replicates to be automatically retried if there are any failures, up to 8 times, at which point the replicate is marked dead and we are unable to run analysis for the entire experiment. We call each of these attempts at running replicates a replicate execution. This section lists all replicate executions that failed due to the target crashing or being oom killed.

Note: In the below tables we bucket failures by experiment, variant, and failure type. For each of these buckets we list out the replicate indexes that failed with an annotation signifying how many times said replicate failed with the given failure mode. In the below example the baseline variant of the experiment named experiment_with_failures had two replicates that failed by oom kills. Replicate 0, which failed 8 executions, and replicate 1 which failed 6 executions, all with the same failure mode.

Experiment Variant Replicates Failure Logs Debug Dashboard
experiment_with_failures baseline 0 (x8) 1 (x6) Oom killed Debug Dashboard

The debug dashboard links will take you to a debugging dashboard specifically designed to investigate replicate execution failures.

❌ Retried Normal Replicate Execution Failures (non-profiling)

Experiment Variant Replicates Failure Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle baseline 7 Oom killed Debug Dashboard

❌ Retried Profiling Replicate Execution Failures (ddprof)

Note: Profiling replicas may still be executing. See the debug dashboard for up to date status.

Experiment Variant Replicates Failure Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_logs comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.

  • 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_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 9/10 replicas passed. Failed 1 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@kacper-murzyn

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

At the moment we don't observe the issues that this PR was supposed to address that much, and getting it merged is not trivial, so I am closing it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

backport bot changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-build team/agent-configuration team/agent-devx team/ebpf-platform team/windows-products

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants