Skip to content

[CI Visibility] Implement ITR code coverage backfill#8626

Merged
tonyredondo merged 13 commits into
masterfrom
feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill
Jun 17, 2026
Merged

[CI Visibility] Implement ITR code coverage backfill#8626
tonyredondo merged 13 commits into
masterfrom
feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill

Conversation

@tonyredondo

@tonyredondo tonyredondo commented May 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary of changes

  • Implements ITR code coverage backfill for .NET test runs that skip tests while a line-coverage source is active.
  • Parses backend meta.coverage bitmaps from skippable-tests responses using the .NET FileBitmap representation and persists scoped backfill data across child processes, injected sessions, AppDomains, and coverage tool adapters.
  • Backfills line coverage for Datadog internal coverage, Coverlet in-memory results, Coverlet collector XML attachments, Cobertura/OpenCover XML, and line-capable Microsoft CodeCoverage XML reports.
  • Rewrites supported customer-visible report files before downstream coverage tools read their final results.
  • Publishes one session-level test.code_coverage.lines_pct result through source arbitration, with test.code_coverage.backfilled when the selected result used backend-aware coverage data.
  • Keeps ITR skip behavior aligned with the Java reference implementation: when line coverage is active, a skippable test is denied only when the backend marks that candidate with _missing_line_code_coverage=true. Missing or invalid aggregate meta.coverage disables safe backfill publication, but does not globally disable ITR skipping.
  • Sends custom test configuration tags to the backend and trusts the backend response, matching Java. The tracer does not locally filter skippable tests by custom configurations.

Reason for change

ITR can skip tests that would otherwise contribute line coverage. Without backfill, coverage tools and the Datadog session metric can under-report line coverage for a run where skipped tests were intentionally omitted. The backend now returns skipped-test line coverage in the skippable-tests response, so the tracer can merge backend line bitmaps with local coverage before publishing the session result or rewriting external reports.

References:

Java compatibility notes

This PR follows the Java reference behavior for the user-visible ITR decision:

  • custom test configurations are sent to the backend, but are not used for local post-filtering.
  • test.bundle/module scope is used to associate backend candidates with the current module scope.
  • _missing_line_code_coverage=true prevents skipping that candidate when line coverage is active.
  • Missing, absent, or invalid aggregate meta.coverage does not prevent ITR from skipping tests. It only means the .NET tracer must avoid publishing a backfilled coverage result that cannot be proven safe.

The intentional implementation difference is bitmap representation: Java decodes backend coverage into BitSet, while .NET keeps the existing FileBitmap representation for both decoding backend coverage and sending/persisting coverage data.

Review diagrams

End-to-end backfill flow

flowchart TD
  A["dotnet test / vstest / coverage command starts"]
  B["CoverageBackfillCapability inspects command, runsettings, response files, and report outputs"]
  C{"Line-capable coverage source active?"}
  D["Legacy ITR behavior; no backfill required"]
  E["Request scoped skippable tests for the current test.bundle/module"]
  F["Backend returns skippable candidates, _missing_line_code_coverage flags, and optional meta.coverage"]
  G["Java-compatible skip gate decides whether each candidate may be skipped"]
  H["Framework integration records the actual ITR skip only after it commits to skipping"]
  I["CoverageBackfillData decodes meta.coverage with FileBitmap"]
  J["CoverageBackfillDataStore persists backend coverage, actual-skip state, scoped backfillable state, IPC results, and IPC failures"]
  K["Coverage producers apply or rewrite line coverage results"]
  L["Validation checks paths, represented backend lines, producer completeness, and IPC state"]
  M["CodeCoverageResultAggregator selects one publishable source by priority"]
  N["Session publishes test.code_coverage.lines_pct and test.code_coverage.backfilled when applicable"]

  A --> B --> C
  C -- "no" --> D
  C -- "yes" --> E --> F
  F --> G --> H --> J
  F --> I --> J
  J --> K --> L --> M --> N
Loading

Skippable scope and Java-compatible skip gate

flowchart TD
  A["Skippable-tests response item"]
  B{"Top-level test.bundle mismatches scoped request?"}
  C["Drop only this mismatched candidate"]
  D["Keep candidate; do not filter by custom configs"]
  E{"Line coverage active?"}
  F["Use legacy ITR skip behavior"]
  G{"Candidate has _missing_line_code_coverage=true?"}
  H["Do not skip this candidate"]
  I["Allow ITR skip"]
  J["meta.coverage is decoded separately and is not part of the skip decision"]

  A --> B
  B -- "yes" --> C
  B -- "no" --> D
  D --> E
  E -- "no" --> F --> I
  E -- "yes" --> G
  G -- "yes" --> H
  G -- "no or absent" --> I
  J -. "matches Java" .-> G
Loading

Coverage producers, persistence, and publication

flowchart LR
  A["Backend meta.coverage FileBitmap data"]
  B["Actual ITR skip markers"]
  C["CoverageBackfillDataStore"]

  subgraph Producers["Coverage producers"]
    D["Datadog internal coverage"]
    E["Coverlet in-memory result"]
    F["Coverlet collector XML fallback"]
    G["Cobertura/OpenCover XML"]
    H["Microsoft CodeCoverage XML"]
  end

  I["Apply backend line bitmaps or rewrite customer-visible XML"]
  J["Send live IPC result or persist result/failure marker"]
  K["Validate source paths, represented lines, partial merges, and IPC completeness"]
  L["Suppress stale or unsafe results"]
  M["Select highest-priority publishable source"]
  N["Publish final session coverage tags"]

  A --> C
  B --> C
  C --> Producers
  Producers --> I --> J --> K
  K -- "safe" --> M --> N
  K -- "unsafe" --> L
Loading

Implementation details

  • Adds CoverageBackfillData parsing for backend meta.coverage, including bitmap decoding, validation, merging, and source-path normalization.
  • Adds CoverageBackfillDataStore to persist backend coverage, actual-skip markers, backfillable scoped skip state, coverage IPC results, and coverage IPC failures across process and AppDomain boundaries.
  • Adds scoped skippable-tests requests when coverage backfill is required, using test.bundle plus runtime/configuration fingerprinting so backend coverage matches the current local execution scope.
  • Separates skippable candidates from tests actually skipped by ITR. Framework integrations record coverage-backfill skip state when they commit to an ITR skip; Test.Close records the session-level "ITR skip happened" tag state later.
  • Uses Java-compatible skip gating: the skip decision checks the backend candidate's _missing_line_code_coverage flag, while aggregate backend coverage validity is tracked separately for deciding whether a backfilled coverage result can be published.
  • Adds CoverageBackfillCapability and command-line parsing for activation checks across dotnet test, vstest, dotnet-coverage, Coverlet collector/MSBuild, Microsoft CodeCoverage, response files, runsettings, MSBuild properties, filters, framework selectors, thresholds, and generated report paths.
  • Adds shared path matching and validation state so partial coverage reports can only publish when their merged result represents all required backend skipped-test lines and did not rely on unsafe local suffix matches.
  • Adds adapters for Datadog internal global coverage, Coverlet modules, Coverlet collector XML fallback, external Cobertura/OpenCover XML, and Microsoft CodeCoverage XML.
  • Adds CodeCoverageResultAggregator to select the final session result by source priority and suppress ambiguous count-based same-source merges.

Key behavior cases

  • If no coverage report source is active, ITR keeps the legacy skip behavior and no coverage backfill is applied.
  • If line coverage is active, a skippable test is not skipped only when the backend marks that candidate as missing line coverage.
  • If backend aggregate meta.coverage is missing or invalid, ITR can still skip tests, but the session will not publish a backfilled coverage result unless another validated producer result is available.
  • If coverage is active but no test is actually skipped by ITR, reports can still be read normally and backend backfill is not applied.
  • If an external XML report is selected, it has higher priority than internal or IPC-based coverage results.
  • If a child coverage tool cannot deliver a complete result when backfill publication is required, the session fails closed for coverage publication instead of publishing stale lower-priority coverage.
  • Branch, method, condition, complexity, and threshold metadata are preserved but not reconstructed from backend data; backend coverage is line bitmap data only.

Source priority

CodeCoverageResultAggregator selects the highest-priority publishable result:

  1. ExternalXml
  2. CoverletXmlFallback
  3. Coverlet
  4. MicrosoftCodeCoverage
  5. Unknown
  6. DatadogInternal

Same-source results with line counts are only publishable when they were explicitly merged by the producer or can be validated without ambiguous count aggregation.

Type guide

Type Responsibility
CoverageBackfillData Decodes and validates backend meta.coverage bitmaps.
CoverageBackfillDataStore Persists backend coverage, actual-skip state, scoped backfillable skip state, IPC results, and IPC failures.
CoverageBackfillCapability Determines whether backfill is required and whether the active coverage command/report path is safe.
CoverageBackfillCommandLine Parses command lines, response files, runsettings, MSBuild properties, and coverage output options for capability checks.
CoverageBackfillPathMatcher / CoverageBackfillPathMatchTracker Matches backend source paths to local report paths and detects unsafe suffix ambiguity.
CoverageBackfillApplicator Applies backend line bitmaps to Datadog internal global coverage.
ExternalCoverageXmlBackfill Parses, validates, rewrites, and merges line-capable XML reports.
CoverletCoverageBackfill Mutates Coverlet's in-memory modules before Coverlet calculates its line summary.
CodeCoverageBackfillValidation Carries cross-result validation state so partial producer results only publish when the merged set is complete and safe.
TestOptimizationSkippableFeature Requests scoped skippable tests, gates coverage-active skips, and records actual ITR skip state.
SessionCodeCoverageMessage Sends source-specific coverage results from child tools/domains to the parent test session.
CodeCoverageResultAggregator Suppresses unsafe results, merges validated producer output, and selects the final session coverage source by priority.

Test coverage

Added and expanded coverage across:

  • backend meta.coverage parsing, bitmap merging, invalid payload handling, missing coverage, and missing-line metadata;
  • Java-compatible skippable parsing behavior for custom configurations and test.bundle module scope;
  • scoped skippable requests, actual-skip tracking, bundle/config fingerprinting, and coverage-publication safety state;
  • Datadog internal coverage backfill and LineCallCount semantics;
  • Coverlet module mutation, rollback, validation, partial result merging, and IPC failure paths;
  • Cobertura, OpenCover, Microsoft CodeCoverage XML parsing/rewrite/merge paths;
  • path normalization, suffix ambiguity detection, source-root ambiguity, represented-line validation, and multi-report validation;
  • dotnet test, VSTest, Coverlet, Microsoft CodeCoverage, dotnet-coverage, response file, runsettings, and MSBuild command detection;
  • session result arbitration, persisted IPC recovery, atomic marker/result races, late Coverlet XML fallback, and injected session behavior.

Recent validation:

  • Java-parity focused unit tests for skippable parsing, skip gating, and backend coverage decoding passed on net10.0.
  • AttributeTests.AttributesInstantiationsOnlyUseBuiltinTypes passed on net10.0 and net9.0 x64.
  • IpcTests.IpcClientCanSendCoverageMessageWithBackfillValidation passed on net10.0.
  • ManagedVanguardStopIntegrationTests.DeduplicatesEquivalentMicrosoftLineXmlPathsBeforeBackfill passed on net10.0.
  • git diff --check: clean.

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented May 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-06-17 09:47:34

Comparing candidate commit e561524 in PR branch feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill with baseline commit 70bd773 in branch master.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 1 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 71 metrics, 0 unstable metrics, 62 known flaky benchmarks, 64 flaky benchmarks without significant changes.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

  • 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
  • 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark.SendAsync net472

  • 🟥 throughput [-6304.415op/s; -6061.536op/s] or [-7.197%; -6.920%]

Known flaky benchmarks

These benchmarks are marked as flaky and will not trigger a failure. Modify FLAKY_BENCHMARKS_REGEX to control which benchmarks are marked as flaky.

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net472

  • 🟥 throughput [-7588.184op/s; -6930.470op/s] or [-8.997%; -8.217%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 throughput [-7914.382op/s; -6618.079op/s] or [-8.047%; -6.729%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+310.759ms; +318.140ms] or [+154.210%; +157.872%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-43.007op/s; -39.185op/s] or [-7.738%; -7.050%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+381.961ms; +383.868ms] or [+301.773%; +303.279%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+87.890op/s; +91.091op/s] or [+11.588%; +12.010%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+393.507ms; +396.941ms] or [+348.239%; +351.278%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody net472

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.308KB; +1.308KB] or [+27.528%; +27.540%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody net6.0

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+471 bytes; +472 bytes] or [+9.976%; +9.987%]
  • 🟩 execution_time [-16.076ms; -11.910ms] or [-7.508%; -5.562%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.272KB; +1.272KB] or [+27.500%; +27.510%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody net472

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.307KB; +1.307KB] or [+105.743%; +105.758%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-292908.267op/s; -288170.125op/s] or [-29.907%; -29.424%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody net6.0

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+471 bytes; +472 bytes] or [+38.557%; +38.566%]
  • 🟩 execution_time [-25.585ms; -20.732ms] or [-11.410%; -9.245%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.272KB; +1.272KB] or [+105.288%; +105.304%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-152579.055op/s; -135659.257op/s] or [-21.923%; -19.492%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+9079.540op/s; +12022.260op/s] or [+5.777%; +7.650%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟩 throughput [+9725.602op/s; +12401.030op/s] or [+7.748%; +9.879%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+480905.836op/s; +492695.404op/s] or [+16.035%; +16.429%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟩 execution_time [-19.016ms; -14.651ms] or [-8.765%; -6.754%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+143728.028op/s; +199269.775op/s] or [+5.705%; +7.910%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.686ms; +300.431ms] or [+149.743%; +150.115%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+297.895ms; +313.922ms] or [+150.229%; +158.311%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.611ms; +303.160ms] or [+151.424%; +152.708%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+296.416ms; +297.893ms] or [+145.588%; +146.313%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+296.420ms; +298.915ms] or [+144.909%; +146.129%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.596ms; +305.029ms] or [+151.237%; +152.453%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+19.625µs; +43.233µs] or [+6.265%; +13.802%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-405.532op/s; -206.854op/s] or [-12.642%; -6.448%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.172ms; +301.043ms] or [+149.816%; +150.251%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+421.042ms; +426.781ms] or [+457.480%; +463.715%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+674.535op/s; +845.670op/s] or [+5.543%; +6.949%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable execution_time [+268.897ms; +321.444ms] or [+204.171%; +244.070%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

  • unstable execution_time [+325.849ms; +381.274ms] or [+149.822%; +175.306%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-573.833op/s; -516.893op/s] or [-51.995%; -46.836%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0

  • unstable execution_time [+200.783ms; +334.004ms] or [+85.565%; +142.338%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-674.169op/s; -590.648op/s] or [-44.967%; -39.396%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+323.875ms; +332.396ms] or [+193.715%; +198.811%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-381.135op/s; -345.132op/s] or [-26.538%; -24.031%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable throughput [+7.669op/s; +49.669op/s] or [+2.205%; +14.277%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice net6.0

  • 🟩 execution_time [-158.841µs; -106.996µs] or [-8.046%; -5.420%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+30.825op/s; +44.808op/s] or [+6.085%; +8.846%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+304.121ms; +306.086ms] or [+153.150%; +154.139%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.308ms; +302.627ms] or [+150.485%; +151.647%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+37541.463op/s; +44826.639op/s] or [+5.919%; +7.067%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+303.030ms; +307.141ms] or [+152.229%; +154.294%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.283ms; +303.820ms] or [+151.797%; +152.568%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.381ms; +301.434ms] or [+148.031%; +149.046%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+306.169ms; +310.348ms] or [+155.180%; +157.298%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.124ms; +302.359ms] or [+151.137%; +151.757%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+296.502ms; +311.470ms] or [+147.779%; +155.239%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+34971.310op/s; +49515.541op/s] or [+6.944%; +9.832%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.398ms; +305.224ms] or [+149.943%; +151.846%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0

  • 🟩 execution_time [-15.900ms; -12.250ms] or [-7.393%; -5.696%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark net472

  • unstable execution_time [+5.304µs; +48.207µs] or [+1.310%; +11.907%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark net6.0

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-20.758KB; -20.735KB] or [-7.572%; -7.564%]
  • unstable execution_time [-30.640µs; +24.006µs] or [-6.056%; +4.745%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable execution_time [-29.408µs; +32.115µs] or [-5.096%; +5.565%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark net6.0

  • unstable execution_time [+8.638µs; +13.681µs] or [+20.417%; +32.338%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-5788.541op/s; -3852.443op/s] or [-24.368%; -16.218%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable execution_time [-12.873µs; -5.141µs] or [-19.972%; -7.977%]
  • unstable throughput [+1159.600op/s; +2845.565op/s] or [+7.115%; +17.458%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.420ms; +302.679ms] or [+152.354%; +152.991%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+303.079ms; +305.459ms] or [+154.266%; +155.478%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.827ms; +301.865ms] or [+150.100%; +151.121%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+42469.542op/s; +51660.898op/s] or [+8.039%; +9.778%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.760ms; +302.421ms] or [+149.902%; +150.729%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.232ms; +303.746ms] or [+151.264%; +152.527%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+304.412ms; +307.056ms] or [+154.378%; +155.719%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.855ms; +300.870ms] or [+149.569%; +150.075%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+66131555.066op/s; +66483726.865op/s] or [+48.161%; +48.418%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net6.0

  • 🟥 execution_time [+423.331ms; +427.504ms] or [+526.487%; +531.678%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.670ms; +300.852ms] or [+149.469%; +150.058%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+18037595.234op/s; +19032220.156op/s] or [+7.989%; +8.430%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+86263.971op/s; +95595.675op/s] or [+8.054%; +8.925%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟩 throughput [+51461.923op/s; +71239.247op/s] or [+5.957%; +8.246%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+83455.859op/s; +113485.539op/s] or [+6.460%; +8.784%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟩 throughput [+90937.669op/s; +99916.184op/s] or [+9.032%; +9.923%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+46901.615op/s; +52191.825op/s] or [+8.516%; +9.477%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes netcoreapp3.1

  • 🟩 throughput [+24642.423op/s; +34247.670op/s] or [+5.516%; +7.666%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin net6.0

  • 🟩 throughput [+81964.591op/s; +102471.118op/s] or [+9.157%; +11.449%]

Known flaky benchmarks without significant changes:

  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool net6.0
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin netcoreapp3.1

@dd-trace-dotnet-ci-bot

dd-trace-dotnet-ci-bot Bot commented May 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing This PR (8626) and master.

✅ No regressions detected - check the details below

Full Metrics Comparison

FakeDbCommand

Metric Master (Mean ± 95% CI) Current (Mean ± 95% CI) Change Status
.NET Framework 4.8 - Baseline
duration73.00 ± (73.05 - 73.37) ms75.26 ± (75.14 - 75.62) ms+3.1%✅⬆️
.NET Framework 4.8 - Bailout
duration77.57 ± (77.48 - 77.89) ms78.59 ± (78.63 - 79.02) ms+1.3%✅⬆️
.NET Framework 4.8 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
duration1099.73 ± (1098.32 - 1104.44) ms1095.04 ± (1096.43 - 1103.14) ms-0.4%✅
.NET Core 3.1 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms22.53 ± (22.49 - 22.57) ms22.77 ± (22.72 - 22.81) ms+1.0%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms83.86 ± (83.68 - 84.04) ms85.92 ± (85.66 - 86.18) ms+2.5%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed10.90 ± (10.90 - 10.91) MB10.91 ± (10.91 - 10.91) MB+0.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count12 ± (12 - 12)12 ± (12 - 12)+0.0%✅
.NET Core 3.1 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms22.61 ± (22.57 - 22.66) ms22.41 ± (22.37 - 22.46) ms-0.9%✅
process.time_to_main_ms85.61 ± (85.41 - 85.81) ms85.54 ± (85.33 - 85.75) ms-0.1%✅
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed10.95 ± (10.95 - 10.96) MB10.96 ± (10.96 - 10.96) MB+0.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count13 ± (13 - 13)13 ± (13 - 13)+0.0%✅
.NET Core 3.1 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms214.90 ± (213.96 - 215.84) ms215.30 ± (214.39 - 216.22) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms540.10 ± (538.63 - 541.56) ms542.38 ± (540.94 - 543.82) ms+0.4%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed48.31 ± (48.28 - 48.34) MB48.48 ± (48.45 - 48.51) MB+0.4%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count28 ± (28 - 28)28 ± (28 - 28)-0.1%✅
.NET 6 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms21.36 ± (21.33 - 21.39) ms21.39 ± (21.35 - 21.44) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms72.86 ± (72.69 - 73.03) ms73.36 ± (73.19 - 73.53) ms+0.7%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed10.63 ± (10.63 - 10.63) MB10.64 ± (10.63 - 10.64) MB+0.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count10 ± (10 - 10)10 ± (10 - 10)+0.0%✅
.NET 6 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms21.68 ± (21.64 - 21.73) ms21.24 ± (21.20 - 21.28) ms-2.0%✅
process.time_to_main_ms76.14 ± (75.90 - 76.37) ms73.94 ± (73.76 - 74.11) ms-2.9%✅
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed10.74 ± (10.74 - 10.74) MB10.74 ± (10.74 - 10.74) MB+0.0%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count11 ± (11 - 11)11 ± (11 - 11)+0.0%✅
.NET 6 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms370.44 ± (368.29 - 372.59) ms373.59 ± (371.34 - 375.85) ms+0.9%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms546.86 ± (545.69 - 548.03) ms547.74 ± (546.65 - 548.84) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed49.79 ± (49.77 - 49.81) MB50.00 ± (49.97 - 50.02) MB+0.4%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count28 ± (28 - 28)28 ± (28 - 28)+0.1%✅⬆️
.NET 8 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms19.52 ± (19.49 - 19.55) ms19.72 ± (19.67 - 19.77) ms+1.0%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms72.44 ± (72.30 - 72.59) ms74.10 ± (73.90 - 74.31) ms+2.3%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed7.65 ± (7.65 - 7.66) MB7.70 ± (7.70 - 7.71) MB+0.6%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count10 ± (10 - 10)10 ± (10 - 10)+0.0%✅
.NET 8 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms19.40 ± (19.36 - 19.44) ms19.62 ± (19.58 - 19.65) ms+1.1%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms73.74 ± (73.58 - 73.91) ms73.86 ± (73.69 - 74.04) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed7.70 ± (7.69 - 7.70) MB7.73 ± (7.73 - 7.74) MB+0.5%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count11 ± (11 - 11)11 ± (11 - 11)+0.0%✅
.NET 8 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms298.69 ± (296.40 - 300.98) ms295.67 ± (293.33 - 298.00) ms-1.0%✅
process.time_to_main_ms496.60 ± (495.54 - 497.65) ms495.25 ± (494.29 - 496.22) ms-0.3%✅
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count0 ± (0 - 0)0 ± (0 - 0)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed36.84 ± (36.81 - 36.87) MB37.14 ± (37.12 - 37.17) MB+0.8%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count27 ± (27 - 27)27 ± (27 - 27)-0.6%✅

HttpMessageHandler

Metric Master (Mean ± 95% CI) Current (Mean ± 95% CI) Change Status
.NET Framework 4.8 - Baseline
duration199.07 ± (198.81 - 199.76) ms200.00 ± (199.66 - 200.55) ms+0.5%✅⬆️
.NET Framework 4.8 - Bailout
duration202.88 ± (202.20 - 203.05) ms203.24 ± (202.77 - 203.49) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
.NET Framework 4.8 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
duration1190.88 ± (1191.32 - 1196.80) ms1196.20 ± (1196.86 - 1202.83) ms+0.4%✅⬆️
.NET Core 3.1 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms191.67 ± (191.26 - 192.07) ms192.53 ± (192.13 - 192.94) ms+0.5%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms82.96 ± (82.70 - 83.21) ms83.43 ± (83.21 - 83.65) ms+0.6%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count3 ± (3 - 3)3 ± (3 - 3)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed16.13 ± (16.11 - 16.16) MB16.11 ± (16.08 - 16.13) MB-0.2%✅
runtime.dotnet.threads.count20 ± (20 - 20)20 ± (20 - 20)+0.2%✅⬆️
.NET Core 3.1 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms191.60 ± (191.11 - 192.09) ms193.91 ± (193.40 - 194.43) ms+1.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms84.24 ± (83.99 - 84.49) ms85.09 ± (84.85 - 85.32) ms+1.0%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count3 ± (3 - 3)3 ± (3 - 3)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed16.23 ± (16.20 - 16.26) MB16.17 ± (16.14 - 16.20) MB-0.4%✅
runtime.dotnet.threads.count21 ± (21 - 21)21 ± (21 - 21)+0.5%✅⬆️
.NET Core 3.1 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms384.75 ± (383.55 - 385.95) ms385.45 ± (384.25 - 386.66) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms534.38 ± (533.36 - 535.39) ms536.14 ± (534.94 - 537.34) ms+0.3%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count3 ± (3 - 3)3 ± (3 - 3)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed57.27 ± (57.13 - 57.41) MB57.40 ± (57.27 - 57.54) MB+0.2%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count30 ± (30 - 30)30 ± (30 - 30)-0.1%✅
.NET 6 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms196.42 ± (195.90 - 196.93) ms197.89 ± (197.41 - 198.37) ms+0.8%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms72.36 ± (72.08 - 72.63) ms72.77 ± (72.42 - 73.11) ms+0.6%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed16.42 ± (16.39 - 16.45) MB16.43 ± (16.39 - 16.46) MB+0.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count19 ± (19 - 19)19 ± (19 - 19)-0.2%✅
.NET 6 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms194.93 ± (194.36 - 195.50) ms196.86 ± (196.45 - 197.27) ms+1.0%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms73.00 ± (72.73 - 73.27) ms73.43 ± (73.21 - 73.64) ms+0.6%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed16.44 ± (16.42 - 16.47) MB16.52 ± (16.50 - 16.55) MB+0.5%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count20 ± (20 - 20)20 ± (20 - 20)+0.2%✅⬆️
.NET 6 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms583.52 ± (580.70 - 586.34) ms590.23 ± (587.76 - 592.71) ms+1.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms544.39 ± (543.28 - 545.50) ms543.09 ± (541.87 - 544.30) ms-0.2%✅
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed61.07 ± (60.99 - 61.15) MB61.48 ± (61.37 - 61.59) MB+0.7%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count31 ± (31 - 31)31 ± (31 - 31)+0.0%✅⬆️
.NET 8 - Baseline
process.internal_duration_ms194.33 ± (193.94 - 194.71) ms196.13 ± (195.62 - 196.63) ms+0.9%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms71.45 ± (71.18 - 71.72) ms72.27 ± (72.03 - 72.51) ms+1.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed11.74 ± (11.71 - 11.77) MB11.75 ± (11.73 - 11.78) MB+0.1%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count18 ± (18 - 18)18 ± (18 - 18)+0.0%✅⬆️
.NET 8 - Bailout
process.internal_duration_ms194.26 ± (193.85 - 194.67) ms194.98 ± (194.54 - 195.43) ms+0.4%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms72.81 ± (72.60 - 73.02) ms73.37 ± (73.18 - 73.57) ms+0.8%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed11.81 ± (11.78 - 11.84) MB11.83 ± (11.81 - 11.85) MB+0.2%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count19 ± (19 - 19)19 ± (19 - 19)-0.3%✅
.NET 8 - CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
process.internal_duration_ms510.11 ± (507.46 - 512.76) ms511.22 ± (508.89 - 513.55) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
process.time_to_main_ms492.28 ± (491.55 - 493.00) ms493.47 ± (492.67 - 494.27) ms+0.2%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.exceptions.count4 ± (4 - 4)4 ± (4 - 4)+0.0%✅
runtime.dotnet.mem.committed50.65 ± (50.62 - 50.69) MB50.95 ± (50.91 - 50.99) MB+0.6%✅⬆️
runtime.dotnet.threads.count29 ± (29 - 30)29 ± (29 - 29)-0.6%✅
Comparison explanation

Execution-time benchmarks measure the whole time it takes to execute a program, and are intended to measure the one-off costs. Cases where the execution time results for the PR are worse than latest master results are highlighted in **red**. The following thresholds were used for comparing the execution times:

  • Welch test with statistical test for significance of 5%
  • Only results indicating a difference greater than 5% and 5 ms are considered.

Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see the dashboard.

Graphs show the p99 interval based on the mean and StdDev of the test run, as well as the mean value of the run (shown as a diamond below the graph).

Duration charts
FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.8) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.8)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (75ms)  : 72, 79
    master - mean (73ms)  : 71, 76

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (79ms)  : 76, 82
    master - mean (78ms)  : 75, 81

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (1,100ms)  : 1051, 1148
    master - mean (1,101ms)  : 1056, 1147
Loading
FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (117ms)  : 112, 121
    master - mean (114ms)  : 111, 118

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (116ms)  : 112, 119
    master - mean (116ms)  : 113, 119

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (796ms)  : 771, 820
    master - mean (794ms)  : 771, 817
Loading
FakeDbCommand (.NET 6) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 6)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (102ms)  : 98, 106
    master - mean (101ms)  : 98, 105

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (102ms)  : 100, 105
    master - mean (105ms)  : 101, 109

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (957ms)  : 917, 997
    master - mean (948ms)  : 910, 985
Loading
FakeDbCommand (.NET 8) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 8)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (102ms)  : 98, 107
    master - mean (100ms)  : 96, 103

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (101ms)  : 98, 104
    master - mean (101ms)  : 99, 103

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (824ms)  : 782, 867
    master - mean (826ms)  : 779, 873
Loading
HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.8) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.8)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (200ms)  : 195, 205
    master - mean (199ms)  : 193, 206

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (203ms)  : 200, 207
    master - mean (203ms)  : 199, 207

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (1,200ms)  : 1157, 1242
    master - mean (1,194ms)  : 1155, 1233
Loading
HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (286ms)  : 281, 292
    master - mean (284ms)  : 277, 292

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (289ms)  : 281, 297
    master - mean (285ms)  : 277, 293

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (962ms)  : 940, 984
    master - mean (958ms)  : 938, 977
Loading
HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (279ms)  : 271, 287
    master - mean (278ms)  : 272, 284

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (279ms)  : 274, 284
    master - mean (277ms)  : 269, 285

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (1,162ms)  : 1128, 1195
    master - mean (1,157ms)  : 1118, 1196
Loading
HttpMessageHandler (.NET 8) 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 8)
    dateFormat  x
    axisFormat %Q
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (8626) - mean (279ms)  : 272, 286
    master - mean (276ms)  : 270, 282

    section Bailout
    This PR (8626) - mean (279ms)  : 273, 284
    master - mean (277ms)  : 272, 282

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (8626) - mean (1,038ms)  : 994, 1081
    master - mean (1,035ms)  : 994, 1077
Loading

@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch 2 times, most recently from 7cf4fee to c30b95f Compare May 14, 2026 17:20
@tonyredondo tonyredondo marked this pull request as ready for review May 14, 2026 19:48
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested review from a team as code owners May 14, 2026 19:48
@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch 2 times, most recently from 77ebf83 to b2c8a72 Compare May 18, 2026 17:13
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested a review from Copilot May 21, 2026 16:09
Copilot AI reviewed May 21, 2026

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

@datadog-prod-us1-5

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested a review from Copilot May 22, 2026 08:44
Copilot AI reviewed May 22, 2026
View reviewed changes

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 39 out of 54 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/ClrProfiler/AutoInstrumentation/Testing/DotnetTest/DotnetCommon.cs Outdated
@andrewlock

andrewlock commented May 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 28, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 59affa6b18

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Net/TestOptimizationClient.GetSkippableTestsAsync.cs
andrewlock
andrewlock reviewed May 28, 2026
View reviewed changes

@andrewlock andrewlock left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I got about 10% of the way through, but it's just too much, I literally couldn't keep the scope in my head 😅 :blind-approval:

I'd suggest a couple of rounds of AI review instead, because it's probably going to be more useful than me

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillDataStore.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillDataStore.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillApplicator.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillApplicator.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillApplicator.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillData.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillData.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillData.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillPathMatcher.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillPathMatcher.cs Outdated
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested a review from Copilot May 29, 2026 13:27
Copilot AI reviewed May 29, 2026
View reviewed changes

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 41 out of 56 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/ExternalCoverageXmlBackfill.cs
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/SkippableTest.cs
Comment thread tracer/test/Datadog.Trace.Tests/Ci/TestOptimizationFeatureTests.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/TestSession.cs
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested a review from Copilot May 29, 2026 14:50
Copilot AI reviewed May 29, 2026
View reviewed changes

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 41 out of 56 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Models/Global/FileCoverageInfo.cs
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillCapability.cs Outdated
@tonyredondo tonyredondo requested a review from Copilot June 1, 2026 15:02
Copilot AI reviewed Jun 1, 2026

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot encountered an error and was unable to review this pull request. You can try again by re-requesting a review.

@tonyredondo

tonyredondo commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 51b6c71d39

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/TestOptimizationSkippableFeature.cs
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillCommandLine.cs
@tonyredondo

tonyredondo commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1497c386b3

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/TestOptimizationSkippableFeature.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/CoverageBackfillApplicator.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/ExternalCoverageXmlBackfill.cs Outdated
@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch 2 times, most recently from 58670de to 0cc6d25 Compare June 10, 2026 19:41
@tonyredondo

tonyredondo commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 0cc6d25d7f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/TestOptimizationSkippableFeature.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/Coverage/Backfill/ExternalCoverageXmlBackfill.cs Outdated
Comment thread ...g.Trace/ClrProfiler/AutoInstrumentation/Testing/DotnetTest/ManagedVanguardStopIntegration.cs
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/Ci/TestOptimizationSkippableFeature.cs Outdated
@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch from 0cc6d25 to 2233166 Compare June 10, 2026 21:58
@tonyredondo

tonyredondo commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 22331664eb

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace.Tools.Runner/ConfigureCiCommand.cs Outdated
@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch from 2233166 to 1ada8e0 Compare June 10, 2026 22:18
@tonyredondo

tonyredondo commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Another round soon, please!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@tonyredondo tonyredondo force-pushed the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch from 1ada8e0 to 3b8c367 Compare June 10, 2026 23:55
andrewlock
andrewlock approved these changes Jun 17, 2026
View reviewed changes

@andrewlock andrewlock left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not a chance 🙈 :blindfold:

@tonyredondo tonyredondo merged commit 32acee9 into master Jun 17, 2026
140 checks passed
@tonyredondo tonyredondo deleted the feat/itr-code-coverage-backfill branch June 17, 2026 14:53
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the vNext-v3 milestone Jun 17, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code review Copilot Copilot left review comments
@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] left review comments
@anmarchenko anmarchenko anmarchenko approved these changes
@andrewlock andrewlock andrewlock approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area:ci-visibility

Projects

None yet

Milestone

3.47.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@tonyredondo @andrewlock @anmarchenko