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

[no-aggregation] return the MetricSampleBatch to the pool only once done with it #17728

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 22, 2023

Conversation

remeh
Copy link
Contributor

@remeh remeh commented Jun 19, 2023

Returning the MetricSampleBatch earlier (in the batcher.go) was incorrect since the NoAggregationStreamWorker goroutine might still be using it to process its content.

Returning it early was making the MetricSampleBatch available to any running TimeSamplerWorkers, which has the time to write (by indices) its sample in the MetricSampleBatch, eventually still processed (with access by index) by the NoAggregationStreamWorker, resulting in misuse of the metric sample (or its discard if it is a no-aggregation unsupported type such as Distribution and Histograms).

Describe how to test/QA your changes

  • Start an Agent with a bad API key (to not send the traffic)
  • Then start the statsd_normal.go from this gist in a loop: while [ "1" = "1" ]; do go run statsd_normal.go; done
  • Then start the statsd_noagg.go from this gist in a loop: while [ "1" = "1" ]; do go run statsd_noagg.go; done

Wait for a couple minutes and validate that no warning log message (Discarding unsupported metric sample...) are present.

  • Restart the Agent with a good api key to send the traffic and use log_payloads: true
  • Sends a normal metric and validate that it is sent properly
  • Sends a metric with timestamp (do echo -n 'foo:1|c|#tags|T1687203807' | socat -t 0 - UNIX-CLIENT:/path/to/your/statsd.sock) and make sure it is sent properly.

Reviewer's Checklist

  • If known, an appropriate milestone has been selected; otherwise the Triage milestone is set.
  • Use the major_change label if your change either has a major impact on the code base, is impacting multiple teams or is changing important well-established internals of the Agent. This label will be use during QA to make sure each team pay extra attention to the changed behavior. For any customer facing change use a releasenote.
  • A release note has been added or the changelog/no-changelog label has been applied.
  • Changed code has automated tests for its functionality.
  • Adequate QA/testing plan information is provided if the qa/skip-qa label is not applied.
  • At least one team/.. label has been applied, indicating the team(s) that should QA this change.
  • If applicable, docs team has been notified or an issue has been opened on the documentation repo.
  • If applicable, the need-change/operator and need-change/helm labels have been applied.
  • If applicable, the k8s/<min-version> label, indicating the lowest Kubernetes version compatible with this feature.
  • If applicable, the config template has been updated.

… done with it.

Returning the `MetricSampleBatch` earlier (in the `batcher.go`) was incorrect since
the `NoAggregationStreamWorker` goroutine might still be using it to process its content.

Returning it early was making the MetricSampleBatch available to any running
`TimeSamplerWorker`s, which has the time to write (by indices) its sample in
the MetricSampleBatch, eventually still processed (with access by index) by the
`NoAggregationStreaWorker`, resulting in misuse of the metric sample (or its discard
if it is a no-aggregation unsupported type such as Distribution and Histograms).
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Jun 19, 2023

Bloop Bleep... Dogbot Here

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 573dd2da-cdf2-436a-87da-b9b714968e62
Baseline: c07ad80
Comparison: 6147ff4
Total datadog-agent CPUs: 7

Explanation

A regression test is an integrated performance test for datadog-agent in a repeatable rig, with varying configuration for datadog-agent. What follows is a statistical summary of a brief datadog-agent run for each configuration across SHAs given above. The goal of these tests are to determine quickly if datadog-agent performance is changed and to what degree by a pull request.

Because a target's optimization goal performance in each experiment will vary somewhat each time it is run, we can only estimate mean differences in optimization goal relative to the baseline target. We express these differences as a percentage change relative to the baseline target, denoted "Δ mean %". These estimates are made to a precision that balances accuracy and cost control. We represent this precision as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI": there is a 90.00% chance that the true value of "Δ mean %" is in that interval.

We decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if both of the following two criteria are true:

  1. The estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%. This criterion intends to answer the question "Does the estimated change in mean optimization goal performance have a meaningful impact on your customers?". We assume that when |Δ mean %| < 5.00%, the impact on your customers is not meaningful. We also assume that a performance change in optimization goal is worth investigating whether it is an increase or decrease, so long as the magnitude of the change is sufficiently large.

  2. Zero is not in the 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" about "Δ mean %". This statement is equivalent to saying that there is at least a 90.00% chance that the mean difference in optimization goal is not zero. This criterion intends to answer the question, "Is there a statistically significant difference in mean optimization goal performance?". It also means there is no more than a 10.00% chance this criterion reports a statistically significant difference when the true difference in mean optimization goal is zero -- a "false positive". We assume you are willing to accept a 10.00% chance of inaccurately detecting a change in performance when no true difference exists.

The table below, if present, lists those experiments that have experienced a statistically significant change in mean optimization goal performance between baseline and comparison SHAs with 90.00% confidence OR have been detected as newly erratic. Negative values of "Δ mean %" mean that baseline is faster, whereas positive values of "Δ mean %" mean that comparison is faster. Results that do not exhibit more than a ±5.00% change in their mean optimization goal are discarded. An experiment is erratic if its coefficient of variation is greater than 0.1. The abbreviated table will be omitted if no interesting change is observed.

No interesting changes in experiment optimization goals with confidence ≥ 90.00% and |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%.

Fine details of change detection per experiment.
experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI confidence
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.73 [+0.16, +1.30] 89.77%
trace_agent_json ingress throughput +0.03 [+0.01, +0.05] 97.38%
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.06, +0.06] 1.18%
file_to_blackhole egress throughput -0.02 [-0.49, +0.44] 4.74%
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -0.05 [-0.12, +0.02] 66.78%
trace_agent_msgpack ingress throughput -0.06 [-0.08, -0.03] 99.62%
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.56 [-0.62, -0.50] 100.00%

@remeh remeh requested a review from a team as a code owner June 20, 2023 07:32
@kacper-murzyn kacper-murzyn modified the milestones: 7.46.0, 7.47.0 Jun 20, 2023
@remeh remeh modified the milestones: 7.47.0, 7.46.0 Jun 20, 2023
@remeh remeh merged commit 19ecb94 into main Jun 22, 2023
129 of 131 checks passed
@remeh remeh deleted the remeh/noagg-fix-pool-usage branch June 22, 2023 11:18
nenadnoveljic pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 3, 2023
… done with it (#17728)

* [no-aggregation] return the `MetricSampleBatch` to the pool only once done with it.

Returning the `MetricSampleBatch` earlier (in the `batcher.go`) was incorrect since
the `NoAggregationStreamWorker` goroutine might still be using it to process its content.

Returning it early was making the MetricSampleBatch available to any running
`TimeSamplerWorker`s, which has the time to write (by indices) its sample in
the MetricSampleBatch, eventually still processed (with access by index) by the
`NoAggregationStreaWorker`, resulting in misuse of the metric sample (or its discard
if it is a no-aggregation unsupported type such as Distribution and Histograms).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants