[AGENTCFG-79] Remove usage of Viper from comp/logs/agent/config/parser.go #34427
+406
−100
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=57981709 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 2d162ec |
Static quality checks ✅Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: c99883d Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +1.96 | [+1.07, +2.85] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.21 | [-1.72, +4.15] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.30 | [+0.24, +0.36] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.03 | [-0.03, +0.09] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.62, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.83, +0.85] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.79, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.71, +0.72] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.88, +0.87] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.30, +0.28] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.03, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.83, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.26 | [-1.04, +0.52] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.27 | [-0.33, -0.20] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.30 | [-0.77, +0.17] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.69 | [-0.73, -0.65] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | 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 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
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:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
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.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates 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.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate 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_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
hush-hush
approved these changes
Mar 4, 2025
| "encoding/json" | ||
| "fmt" | ||
|
|
||
| "github.com/DataDog/viper" | ||
| yaml "gopkg.in/yaml.v3" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We seems to have a split in the code base between v2 and v3 (108 import of gopkg.in/yaml.v2 vs 33 fo gopkg.in/yaml.v3"). Any reasons to use v3 in particular ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it seems that we are migrating to yaml.v3, so I thought that I would get ahead of the curve: #33450
DDuongNguyen
approved these changes
Mar 6, 2025
DDuongNguyen
reviewed
Mar 6, 2025
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("invalid tags format") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this error could also be more customer facing. could we update the log to something like:
"could not parse YAML config, please double check the yaml files"
Or whatever is supposed to use the function?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
The previous iteration of this PR caused incident-35496.
Motivation
Describe how you validated your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes