8000 remove unused Makefile.trace by chouquette · Pull Request #37797 · DataDog/datadog-agent · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

remove unused Makefile.trace #37797

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

remove unused Makefile.trace #37797

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+0 −38

Conversation

chouquette
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Remove unused Makefile.trace file

Motivation

This appears to be a leftover from agent 5 which we don't need anymore

Describe how you validated your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@chouquette chouquette requested a review from a team as a code owner June 10, 2025 06:22
@chouquette chouquette added changelog/no-changelog qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Jun 10, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Jun 10, 2025
@chouquette chouquette added the ask-review Ask required teams to review this PR label Jun 10, 2025
@cit-pr-commenter cit-pr-commenter
Copy link

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 8b3b1ee0-743d-41f0-93e1-7be159e01271

Baseline: ad0e415
Comparison: c52efff
Diff

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 +2.16 [-0.60, +4.93] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ file_tree memory utilization +1.16 [+0.99, +1.33] 1 Logs
➖ tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +0.91 [+0.85, +0.96] 1 Logs
➖ otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization +0.85 [+0.72, +0.98] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization +0.81 [+0.77, +0.86] 1 Logs
➖ docker_containers_memory memory utilization +0.49 [+0.41, +0.57] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput +0.08 [-0.51, +0.68] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.03 [-0.54, +0.60] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.57, +0.60] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput +0.01 [-0.22, +0.25] 1 Logs
➖ tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.02, +0.02] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.28, +0.28] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_metrics memory utilization -0.01 [-0.12, +0.11] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.03 [-0.64, +0.58] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.06 [-0.66, +0.55] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.06 [-0.67, +0.56] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput -0.13 [-0.69, +0.42] 1 Logs
➖ otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization -0.19 [-0.36, -0.03] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_logs memory utilization -0.46 [-0.59, -0.32] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -0.55 [-1.39, +0.28] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.61 [-0.71, -0.51] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization -0.99 [-3.96, +1.98] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_idle memory utilization -1.12 [-1.20, -1.05] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
✅ docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 10/10
✅ docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10
✅ docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 10/10
✅ 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 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_logs lost_bytes 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 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".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates 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.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 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_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor ad0e415

Successful checks

Info

Quality gate Delta On disk size (MiB) Delta On wire size (MiB)
✅ agent_deb_amd64 $${0}$$ $${696.04}$$ < $${752.99}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${176.03}$$ < $${187.44}$$
✅ agent_deb_amd64_fips $${0}$$ $${694.26}$$ < $${751.36}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${175.44}$$ < $${187.06}$$
✅ agent_heroku_amd64 $${0}$$ $${358.56}$$ < $${369.68}$$ $${-0}$$ $${96.5}$$ < $${99.55}$$
✅ agent_msi $${0}$$ $${959.85}$$ < $${987.01}$$ $${+0.03}$$ $${146.44}$$ < $${150.72}$$
✅ agent_rpm_amd64 $${0}$$ $${696.03}$$ < $${752.98}$$ $${+0}$$ $${177.57}$$ < $${190.03}$$
✅ agent_rpm_amd64_fips $${0}$$ $${694.25}$$ < $${751.35}$$ $${-0}$$ $${177.43}$$ < $${189.81}$$
✅ agent_rpm_arm64 $${0}$$ $${685.98}$$ < $${739.42}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${161.0}$$ < $${171.23}$$
✅ agent_rpm_arm64_fips $${0}$$ $${684.33}$$ < $${737.91}$$ $${+0.03}$$ $${160.1}$$ < $${170.22}$$
✅ agent_suse_amd64 $${0}$$ $${696.03}$$ < $${752.98}$$ $${+0}$$ $${177.57}$$ < $${190.03}$$
✅ agent_suse_amd64_fips $${0}$$ $${694.25}$$ < $${751.35}$$ $${-0}$$ $${177.43}$$ < $${189.81}$$
✅ agent_suse_arm64 $${0}$$ $${685.98}$$ < $${739.42}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${161.0}$$ < $${171.23}$$
✅ agent_suse_arm64_fips $${0}$$ $${684.33}$$ < $${737.91}$$ $${+0.03}$$ $${160.1}$$ < $${170.22}$$
✅ docker_agent_amd64 $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_arm64 $${-0}$$ $${793.23}$$ < $${858.97}$$ $${-0}$$ $${255.97}$$ < $${274.36}$$
✅ docker_agent_jmx_amd64 $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_jmx_arm64 $${-0}$$ $${793.23}$$ < $${858.97}$$ $${-0}$$ $${255.97}$$ < $${274.36}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows1809 $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows1809_core $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows1809_core_jmx $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows1809_jmx $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows2022 $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows2022_core $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows2022_core_jmx $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_agent_windows2022_jmx $${-0}$$ $${779.83}$$ < $${849.39}$$ $${-0}$$ $${268.58}$$ < $${288.34}$$
✅ docker_cluster_agent_amd64 $${-0}$$ $${259.19}$$ < $${259.73}$$ $${+0}$$ $${102.88}$$ < $${103.68}$$
✅ docker_cluster_agent_arm64 $${-0}$$ $${273.64}$$ < $${274.24}$$ $${+0}$$ $${97.59}$$ < $${98.45}$$
✅ docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 $${-0}$$ $${7.08}$$ < $${7.12}$$ $${+0}$$ $${2.95}$$ < $${3.29}$$
✅ docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 $${-0}$$ $${6.69}$$ < $${6.92}$$ $${-0}$$ $${2.7}$$ < $${3.07}$$
✅ docker_dogstatsd_amd64 $${0}$$ $${38.93}$$ < $${39.57}$$ $${+0}$$ $${14.95}$$ < $${15.76}$$
✅ docker_dogstatsd_arm64 $${+0}$$ $${37.52}$$ < $${38.2}$$ $${+0}$$ $${13.96}$$ < $${14.83}$$
✅ dogstatsd_deb_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.61}$$ < $${31.52}$$ $${-0}$$ $${8.03}$$ < $${8.97}$$
✅ dogstatsd_deb_arm64 $${0}$$ $${29.16}$$ < $${30.08}$$ $${+0}$$ $${6.97}$$ < $${7.92}$$
✅ dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.61}$$ < $${31.52}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${8.04}$$ < $${8.98}$$
✅ dogstatsd_suse_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.61}$$ < $${31.52}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${8.04}$$ < $${8.98}$$
✅ iot_agent_deb_amd64 $${0}$$ $${50.48}$$ < $${60.17}$$ $${+0}$$ $${12.85}$$ < $${15.82}$$
✅ iot_agent_deb_arm64 $${0}$$ $${47.93}$$ < $${56.94}$$ $${-0}$$ $${11.14}$$ < $${13.86}$$
✅ iot_agent_deb_armhf $${0}$$ $${47.51}$$ < $${56.41}$$ $${-0}$$ $${11.2}$$ < $${13.86}$$
✅ iot_agent_rpm_amd64 $${0}$$ $${50.48}$$ < $${60.18}$$ $${+0}$$ $${12.86}$$ < $${15.84}$$
✅ iot_agent_rpm_arm64 $${0}$$ $${47.94}$$ < $${56.94}$$ $${+0}$$ $${11.16}$$ < $${13.76}$$
✅ iot_agent_suse_amd64 $${0}$$ $${50.48}$$ < $${60.18}$$ $${+0}$$ $${12.86}$$ < $${15.84}$$

ichinaski
ichinaski reviewed Jun 10, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor
@ichinaski ichinaski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not familiar with Agent 5 build/release process, but this file seems to be needed according to both the Makefile comment and the dd-agent-omnibus file it points to?

https://github.com/DataDog/dd-agent-omnibus/blob/fad8aeb/config/software/datadog-trace-agent.rb#L105

Makefile.trace
@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
# This Makefile is used within the release process of the Datadog Agent 5:
# https://github.com/DataDog/dd-agent-omnibus/blob/fad8aeb/config/software/datadog-trace-agent.rb#L105
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This Makefile is referenced here, I don't think this is safe to be removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author
8000

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I understand things correctly, dd-agent-omnibus is our Agent 5 specific fork of omnibus (unlike datadog/omnibus-ruby which is our agent 6/7 fork of omnibus)
The build script in that repo seems to clone the dd-agent repo, so if we ever need to build agent 5, this commit will not impact that build

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm honestly not familiar with the Omnibus build process for Agent 5. I can leave this PR approved from the trace-agent perspective, but could you ask @DataDog/agent-delivery for an approval as well? 🙏

@github-actions github-actions bot added medium review PR review might take time and removed short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly labels Jun 10, 2025
ichinaski
ichinaski approved these changes Jun 16, 2025
View reviewed changes
Makefile.trace
@@ -1,33 +0,0 @@
# This Makefile is used within the release process of the Datadog Agent 5:
# https://github.com/DataDog/dd-agent-omnibus/blob/fad8aeb/config/software/datadog-trace-agent.rb#L105
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm honestly not familiar with the Omnibus build process for Agent 5. I can leave this PR approved from the trace-agent perspective, but could you ask @DataDog/agent-delivery for an approval as well? 🙏

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

@ichinaski ichinaski ichinaski approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ask-review Ask required teams to review this PR changelog/no-changelog medium review PR review might take time qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@chouquette @ichinaski
0