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

system-probe: Add pkg/process/monitor to tests #25463

Merged
merged 5 commits into from May 16, 2024

Conversation

vitkyrka
Copy link
Contributor

@vitkyrka vitkyrka commented May 8, 2024

What does this PR do?

The process monitor used by USM lives under pkg/process/monitor and has a test suite; run it as part of the system-probe tests to prevent it from breaking.

Motivation

Additional Notes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Describe how to test/QA your changes

The process monitor used by USM lives under pkg/process/monitor and has
a test suite; run it as part of the system-probe tests to prevent it
from breaking.
@vitkyrka vitkyrka added changelog/no-changelog team/ebpf-platform qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests and removed component/system-probe labels May 8, 2024
@vitkyrka vitkyrka marked this pull request as ready for review May 8, 2024 13:04
@vitkyrka vitkyrka requested a review from a team as a code owner May 8, 2024 13:04
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented May 8, 2024

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 34433455 (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-developer-experience

If the package does not contain any dirs for the current set of tags,
ignore it instead of reporting empty paths which cause crashes later.
This is needed now since pkg/process/monitor is not available for
Windows.
@vitkyrka vitkyrka requested a review from gjulianm May 10, 2024 16:04
Copy link
Contributor

@gjulianm gjulianm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor nitpick, looks good :D

tasks/system_probe.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
vitkyrka and others added 2 commits May 16, 2024 11:45
Co-authored-by: Guillermo Julián <gjulianm@users.noreply.github.com>
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented May 16, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 3bfd4ae2-6663-4e82-a37e-0356011f94a9
Baseline: 20c0f40
Comparison: 44ccfe5

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +7.20 [-14.47, +28.87]
basic_py_check % cpu utilization +0.85 [-1.75, +3.45]
file_tree memory utilization +0.42 [+0.32, +0.51]
idle memory utilization +0.41 [+0.37, +0.45]
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +0.06 [-0.32, +0.44]
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.01 [-0.01, +0.02]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.21, +0.21]
trace_agent_msgpack ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.00, +0.00]
trace_agent_json ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.01, +0.01]
pycheck_1000_100byte_tags % cpu utilization -0.12 [-5.02, +4.79]
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -1.81 [-4.67, +1.05]

Explanation

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".

@vitkyrka
Copy link
Contributor Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented May 16, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue

Pull request added to the queue.

There are 2 builds ahead! (estimated merge in less than 1h)

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 49c10b7 into main May 16, 2024
255 of 256 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the vincent.whitchurch/procmontest branch May 16, 2024 16:56
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 7.55.0 milestone May 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog component/system-probe qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/ebpf-platform
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants