Skip to content

Fix initialization of samplers for probe file - #12067

Open
jpbempel wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
jpbempel/fix-samplers-probe-file
Open

Fix initialization of samplers for probe file#12067
jpbempel wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
jpbempel/fix-samplers-probe-file

Conversation

@jpbempel

@jpbempel jpbempel commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What Does This Do

When loading probes from file, initSamplers method is not called for deserialized probes. we centralize probe deserialization in ProbeDefinitionDeserializer class and add smoke test for this.

Motivation

Additional Notes

Contributor Checklist

Jira ticket: DEBUG-5873

When loading probes from file, initSamplers method is not called for
deserialized probes. we centralize probe deserialization in
ProbeDefinitionDeserializer class and add smoke test for this.
@jpbempel
jpbempel requested a review from a team as a code owner July 24, 2026 14:11
@jpbempel
jpbempel requested review from tylfin and removed request for a team July 24, 2026 14:11
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi! 👋 Thanks for your pull request! 🎉

To help us review it, please make sure to:

  • Add at least one type, and one component or instrumentation label to the pull request

If you need help, please check our contributing guidelines.

@jpbempel jpbempel added comp: debugger Dynamic Instrumentation type: bug fix Bug fix labels Jul 24, 2026

@datadog-prod-us1-5 datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot 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.

Datadog Autotest: PASS

More details

The file-loader change correctly centralizes probe deserialization and initializes samplers for log, trigger, and span-decoration probes without changing metric or span handling. No concrete diff-only regression was identified; package tests could not execute because this checkout requires Java 25 while the environment provides Java 21.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

Open Bits AI session

🤖 Datadog Autotest · Commit 8dfe6f4 · What is Autotest? · @DataDog review to ask questions · Any feedback? Reach out in #autotest

@datadog-prod-us1-5

datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Bits found no code fix to apply

🟢 Investigated · ⚪ No code fix needed

build_tests: [:instrumentationTest, inst] was terminated because the CI container was OOM-killed, not because of an unchecked-operation compilation error; no code change applies. Check pull requests requires the repository's type and component/instrumentation labels, while exploration-tests-method-jackson-core cannot pull its signed container image, so both require CI or PR metadata remediation.


View in Datadog | Reviewed commit 8dfe6f4 · Any feedback? Reach out in #deveng-pr-agent

@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: 8dfe6f4c21

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

assertInstanceOf(MetricProbe.class, definitions.get(0));
assertInstanceOf(LogProbe.class, definitions.get(1));
assertEquals(6, definitions.size());
assertInstanceOf(TriggerProbe.class, definitions.get(0));

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Fix expected probe ordering in loader test

The probe-file fixture still starts with a LOG_PROBE and appends the new TRIGGER_PROBE at the end, and ConfigurationFileLoader appends definitions in JSON array order. This assertion therefore fails immediately with a LogProbe at index 0, so the updated test blocks the module test suite before it can verify the sampler initialization change.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

no, Configuration::getDefinitions add definitions in a different order

@datadog-prod-us1-5

datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 57.55% (-0.02%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 0f7334f | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Debugger benchmarks

Parameters

Baseline Candidate
baseline_or_candidate baseline candidate
ci_job_date 1785224447 1785224804
end_time 2026-07-28T07:42:17 2026-07-28T07:48:14
git_branch master jpbempel/fix-samplers-probe-file
git_commit_sha 4e1a3cc 0f7334f
start_time 2026-07-28T07:40:48 2026-07-28T07:46:45
See matching parameters
Baseline Candidate
ci_job_id 1898805004 1898805004
ci_pipeline_id 127351895 127351895
cpu_model Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8175M CPU @ 2.50GHz Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8175M CPU @ 2.50GHz
git_commit_date 1785223907 1785223907

Summary

Found 6 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 3 metrics, 6 unstable metrics.

scenario Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_min Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p50 Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p75 Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p99 Δ mean throughput
scenario:basic better
[-13.345µs; -6.901µs] or [-4.667%; -2.413%]
unsure
[-18.419µs; -2.939µs] or [-5.751%; -0.918%]
unsure
[-19.356µs; -2.376µs] or [-5.808%; -0.713%]
unstable
[-83.740µs; +50.451µs] or [-7.603%; +4.581%]
unstable
[-125.249op/s; +125.249op/s] or [-5.260%; +5.260%]
scenario:loop better
[-561.830µs; -376.177µs] or [-5.984%; -4.007%]
better
[-619.390µs; -418.083µs] or [-6.505%; -4.391%]
better
[-589.256µs; -398.273µs] or [-6.085%; -4.113%]
better
[-597.464µs; -397.779µs] or [-6.056%; -4.032%]
better
[+3.584op/s; +6.553op/s] or [+3.459%; +6.324%]
See unchanged results
scenario Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_min Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p50 Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p75 Δ mean agg_http_req_duration_p99 Δ mean throughput
scenario:noprobe unstable
[-17255.019ns; +18585.286ns] or [-5.591%; +6.022%]
unstable
[-24.317µs; +32.610µs] or [-6.916%; +9.274%]
unstable
[-32.571µs; +44.991µs] or [-8.869%; +12.251%]
unstable
[-147.805µs; +60.426µs] or [-11.470%; +4.689%]
same
Request duration reports for reports
gantt
    title reports - request duration [CI 0.99] : candidate=None, baseline=None
    dateFormat X
    axisFormat %s
section baseline
noprobe (351.606 µs) : 329, 374
.   : milestone, 352,
basic (320.291 µs) : 314, 327
.   : milestone, 320,
loop (9.521 ms) : 9389, 9653
.   : milestone, 9521,
section candidate
noprobe (355.752 µs) : 325, 387
.   : milestone, 356,
basic (309.612 µs) : 301, 318
.   : milestone, 310,
loop (9.002 ms) : 8995, 9010
.   : milestone, 9002,
Loading
  • baseline results
Scenario Request median duration [CI 0.99]
noprobe 351.606 µs [329.307 µs, 373.905 µs]
basic 320.291 µs [313.733 µs, 326.849 µs]
loop 9.521 ms [9.389 ms, 9.653 ms]
  • candidate results
Scenario Request median duration [CI 0.99]
noprobe 355.752 µs [324.704 µs, 386.8 µs]
basic 309.612 µs [301.199 µs, 318.024 µs]
loop 9.002 ms [8.995 ms, 9.01 ms]

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🟢 Java Benchmark SLOs — All performance SLOs passed

Suite Status
Startup 🟢 pass

SLO thresholds are defined here based on automatically generated metrics. A warning is raised when results are within 5% of the threshold.

PR vs. master results
Scenario Candidate master Δ (95% CI of mean)
startup:insecure-bank:iast:Agent 14.77 s 14.58 s [+0.6%; +2.1%] (maybe worse)
startup:insecure-bank:tracing:Agent 13.57 s 13.69 s [-1.6%; -0.0%] (maybe better)
startup:petclinic:appsec:Agent 16.78 s 16.01 s [+0.6%; +9.0%] (maybe worse)
startup:petclinic:iast:Agent 16.90 s 16.83 s [-0.4%; +1.3%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:profiling:Agent 16.69 s 16.78 s [-1.7%; +0.7%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:sca:Agent 16.88 s 16.65 s [+0.5%; +2.3%] (maybe worse)
startup:petclinic:tracing:Agent 16.07 s 15.96 s [-0.2%; +1.6%] (no difference)

Commit: 0f7334fa · CI Pipeline · Benchmarking Platform UI


Load and DaCapo benchmarks can be triggered manually in the GitLab pipeline. Results will appear in the Benchmarking Platform UI after completion.

@jpbempel
jpbempel added this pull request to the merge queue Jul 28, 2026
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-07-28 10:08:45 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge


2026-07-28 10:08:49 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in master is approximately 1h (p90).


2026-07-28 10:38:43 UTCMergeQueue: The build pipeline contains failing jobs for this merge request

Build pipeline has failing jobs for ccbb854:

⚠️ Do NOT retry failed jobs directly (why?).

What to do next?

  • Investigate the failures and when ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!
  • If your PR checks are green, try to rebase/merge. It might be because the CI run is a bit old.
  • Any question, go check the FAQ.
Details

Since those jobs are not marked as being allowed to fail, the pipeline will most likely fail.
Therefore, and to allow other builds to be processed, this merge request has been rejected and the pipeline got canceled.

@github-merge-queue
github-merge-queue Bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Jul 28, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

comp: debugger Dynamic Instrumentation type: bug fix Bug fix

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants