[anomalydetection] Smart adaptive log sampling bridge module 2/4 - #53488
Conversation
CelianR
added
changelog/no-changelog
Go Package Import DifferencesBaseline: 05d2265
|
|
🎯 Code Coverage (details) 🔗 Commit SHA: 940d488 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback! |
Files inventory check summaryFile checks results against ancestor 05d2265b: Results for datadog-agent_7.83.0~devel.git.238.940d488.pipeline.125716423-1_amd64.deb:No change detected |
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
16 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 9c3331f ❌ Experiments with retried target crashesThis is a critical error. One or more replicates failed with a non-zero exit code. These replicates may have been retried. See Replicate Execution Details for more information.
Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory utilization | +1.14 | [+0.90, +1.39] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +0.59 | [-0.40, +1.59] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.28 | [+0.24, +0.33] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_security_no_fs_load | memory utilization | +0.25 | [+0.16, +0.34] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load | memory utilization | +0.23 | [+0.20, +0.27] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_security_idle | memory utilization | -0.18 | [-0.24, -0.12] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.28 | [-0.38, -0.18] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | observed_value | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 4 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | 148.47MiB ≤ 154MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 727.68KiB ≤ 819.20KiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 4 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | 494.96MiB ≤ 495MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 1.12MiB ≤ 1.25MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 186.78MiB ≤ 195MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 264.13MiB ≤ 292MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 353.93 ≤ 2000 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 413.35MiB ≤ 430MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 0.93GiB ≤ 1.04GiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_idle | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 28.67 ≤ 100 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | 303.27MiB ≤ 330MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 64.68 ≤ 200 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | 288.32MiB ≤ 310MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_no_fs_load | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 24.24 ≤ 100 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_security_no_fs_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | 286.45MiB ≤ 320MiB | 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:
-
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".
Replicate Execution Details
We run multiple replicates for each experiment/variant. However, we allow replicates to be automatically retried if there are any failures, up to 8 times, at which point the replicate is marked dead and we are unable to run analysis for the entire experiment. We call each of these attempts at running replicates a replicate execution. This section lists all replicate executions that failed due to the target crashing or being oom killed.
Note: In the below tables we bucket failures by experiment, variant, and failure type. For each of these buckets we list out the replicate indexes that failed with an annotation signifying how many times said replicate failed with the given failure mode. In the below example the baseline variant of the experiment named experiment_with_failures had two replicates that failed by oom kills. Replicate 0, which failed 8 executions, and replicate 1 which failed 6 executions, all with the same failure mode.
| Experiment | Variant | Replicates | Failure | Logs | Debug Dashboard |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| experiment_with_failures | baseline | 0 (x8) 1 (x6) | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
The debug dashboard links will take you to a debugging dashboard specifically designed to investigate replicate execution failures.
❌ Retried Normal Replicate Execution Failures (non-profiling)
| Experiment | Variant | Replicates | Failure | Debug Dashboard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| quality_gate_idle_all_features | comparison | 0, 8 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
❌ Retried Profiling Replicate Execution Failures (ddprof)
Note: Profiling replicas may still be executing. See the debug dashboard for up to date status.
| Experiment | Variant | Replicates | Failure | Debug Dashboard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| quality_gate_idle_all_features | baseline | 10 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
| quality_gate_idle_all_features | comparison | 10 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
| quality_gate_logs | comparison | 10 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
| quality_gate_metrics_logs | baseline | 10 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
| quality_gate_metrics_logs | comparison | 10 | Oom killed | Debug Dashboard |
| quality_gate_security_no_fs_load | comparison | 10 | Crashed (exit code: 134) | Debug Dashboard |
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, 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.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I need to rework the architecture for my future PR to avoid duplicate changes, making it draft again. Sorry for that |
5e4395e to
fb5eb22
Compare
dd-octo-sts
Bot
added
internal
Introduces comp/logs/smartadaptivesampling, a bridge component exposing the current anomaly-detection severity level to log samplers. The observer dependency is optional (option.Option[observerdef.Component]), matching the sibling comp/anomalydetection/logssource component, so the component self-disables gracefully if the observer is ever unavailable. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Registers smartadaptivesamplingfx.Module() in comp/logs/bundle.go so the component activates once logs_config.experimental_adaptive_sampling.smart_severity_profiles.enabled is set. README/CODEOWNERS regenerated via dda inv lint-components --fix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
49c1e4c to
537f04d
Compare
|
@codex review |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Sorry, something went wrong.
The component's own fx wiring already ran an fx.Invoke solely to force its eager construction. It now also registers a package-level SetSeverityProvider/ Current pair (added here, in def/bridge.go) with the component's own Current method, in both the real and noop build variants. This is the crossing-point consumers outside the fx graph — and outside pkg/logs, which the log decoder's internal sampler package cannot be reached from directly — need to read the current severity without depending on the fx graph themselves. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
jeremy-hanna
left a comment
jeremy-hanna
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 for agent-runtime owned files
| // This product includes software developed at Datadog (https://www.datadoghq.com/). | ||
| // Copyright 2026-present Datadog, Inc. | ||
|
|
||
| //go:build !python |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are the noop builds only built when python is unavailable at compile time?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes it's for IOT built, anomaly detection isn't included in it. Were you thinking about any other flag?
soberpeach
left a comment
soberpeach
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Approved with some questions
a66d833 to
93e22d7
Compare
|
/merge |
|
View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.
This pull request is not mergeable according to GitHub. Common reasons include pending required checks, missing approvals, or merge conflicts — but it could also be blocked by other repository rules or settings.
The expected merge time in
|
5 participants
What does this PR do?
Note
Feature documentation.
It is not yet consumed by anything (the sampler doesn't read it yet, to be done in future PRs).
This adds the
smartadaptivesamplingmodule, the bridge that receives anomaly detection severity events and exposes the current severity level to consumers.Adds:
smartadaptivesamplingmodule, the bridge that receives anomaly eventssmartadaptivesampling.Module()into the agent run commandMotivation
Describe how you validated your changes
Additional Notes
Ownership is shared with the logs team.
Design note:
smartadaptivesamplingreceives events from anomaly detection and is used as a bridge such that the samplers read the events from there.AAD-4