[Backport 7.72.x] Remove Update Install Source Custom Action - #42186
Conversation
### What does this PR do? This PR removes the update install source custom action that was added in: #40511 ### Motivation https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/WINA-1929 The custom action updated the install source after installing via MSI to use the fleet package name and msi path. This can potentially cause reinstalls to fail as MSI does not use the sourcelist path during reinstalls. ### Describe how you validated your changes Since this is just removing a custom action, the existing e2e tests should ensure that the agent installs and uninstalls just fine. ### Additional Notes (cherry picked from commit 5797a72)
|
/trigger-ci --variable RUN_ALL_BUILDS=true --variable RUN_KITCHEN_TESTS=true --variable RUN_E2E_TESTS=on --variable RUN_UNIT_TESTS=on --variable RUN_KMT_TESTS=on |
|
/merge |
|
View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.
Branch
Started pipeline #79833917 |
|
View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.
This merge 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
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: f42be85 Optimization Goals: ❌ Regression(s) detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.07 | [-1.52, +1.39] | 1 | Logs |
Fine details of change detection per experiment
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | docker_containers_memory | memory utilization | +9.08 | [+8.53, +9.63] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.83 | [+0.79, +0.87] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_delta | memory utilization | +0.72 | [+0.56, +0.89] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics | memory utilization | +0.39 | [+0.22, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_metrics | memory utilization | +0.32 | [+0.19, +0.45] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter | memory utilization | +0.29 | [+0.10, +0.49] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.14 | [+0.07, +0.20] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.13 | [+0.09, +0.17] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.10 | [+0.06, +0.14] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.57, +0.62] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.22, +0.22] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_logs | memory utilization | -0.01 | [-0.06, +0.05] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.65, +0.61] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.60, +0.50] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.07 | [-1.52, +1.39] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.08 | [-0.72, +0.55] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | -0.10 | [-0.16, -0.04] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_logs | memory utilization | -0.16 | [-0.27, -0.04] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative | memory utilization | -0.67 | [-0.80, -0.55] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory utilization | -0.88 | [-1.09, -0.66] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -3.58 | [-6.33, -0.83] | 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_1000ms_latency | 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_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 |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | cpu_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_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:
-
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_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_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, 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_idle, 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_metrics_logs, 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 lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
Backport 5797a72 from #42114.
What does this PR do?
This PR removes the update install source custom action that was added in: #40511
Motivation
https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/WINA-1929
The custom action updated the install source after installing via MSI to use the fleet package name and msi path. This can potentially cause reinstalls to fail as MSI does not use the sourcelist path during reinstalls.
Describe how you validated your changes
Since this is just removing a custom action, the existing e2e tests should ensure that the agent installs and uninstalls just fine.
Additional Notes