Skip to content

Add BUILD file for tools/retry_file_dump - #54665

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 10 commits into
mainfrom
aiuto/rfd
Aug 12, 2026
Merged

Add BUILD file for tools/retry_file_dump#54665
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 10 commits into
mainfrom
aiuto/rfd

Conversation

@aiuto

@aiuto aiuto commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

What does this PR do?

Add BUILD file for tools/retry_file_dump

Motivation

Everything should be buildable with bazel.

Describe how you validated your changes

build and run

 bazel run //tools/retry_file_dump:retry_file_dump
...
INFO: Build completed successfully, 3 total actions
INFO: Running command line: /root/.cache/bazel/_bazel_root/81a15fa9a2846e82038a778136785275/execroot/_main/bazel-out/aarch64-fastbuild/bin/tools/retry_file_dump/retry_file_dump_/retry_file_dump
Invalid folder: Usage `./retry_file_dump --folder=/opt/datadog-agent/run/transactions_to_retry/c47da40ac935c8fd5ca1441a5ee3d068/`

@aiuto
aiuto requested review from a team as code owners August 10, 2026 18:15
@aiuto aiuto added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Aug 10, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the medium review PR review might take time label Aug 10, 2026

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: eadb5de878

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tools/retry_file_dump/README.md Outdated
@datadog-prod-us1-3

datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 52.41% (+0.04%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 2b946e4 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 5dcbd308:

Results for datadog-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.118.2b946e4.pipeline.130297207-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

Results for datadog-iot-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.118.2b946e4.pipeline.130297207-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 5dcbd30
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

33 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 759.656 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 712.982 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 312.355 MiB
agent_msi 643.316 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 759.640 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 712.966 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 735.601 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 692.210 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 759.640 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 712.966 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 735.601 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 692.210 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 818.280 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 819.277 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1009.177 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 998.827 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 210.350 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 223.393 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.439 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.877 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.474 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.560 MiB
docker_host_profiler_amd64 305.803 MiB
docker_host_profiler_arm64 317.121 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 30.219 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.243 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 30.219 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 30.219 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 46.604 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 43.264 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 44.051 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 46.605 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 46.604 MiB

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

cit-pr-commenter-54b7da Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 535e6c7a-7199-41eb-88aa-9e2b59d6f662

Baseline: 5038adb
Comparison: 4b6f43f
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_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.65 [+0.40, +0.90] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory utilization +0.29 [+0.17, +0.41] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory utilization +0.23 [+0.13, +0.33] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.22 [+0.17, +0.26] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory utilization +0.12 [+0.05, +0.19] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.03 [-0.09, +0.15] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory utilization -0.04 [-0.18, +0.11] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -1.08 [-1.92, -0.23] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 4 = 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 0/10 173.44MiB > 154MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 730.79KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 4 = 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 7/10 523.01MiB > 512MiB 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 18 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 0/10 202.68MiB > 195MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 264.15MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 412.88 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 16 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 412.35MiB ≤ 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 0.94GiB ≤ 1.04GiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory_usage 10/10 71.97MiB ≤ 75MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle cpu_usage 10/10 30.53 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory_usage 10/10 327.18MiB ≤ 330MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 69.55 ≤ 200 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 301.89MiB ≤ 310MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 25.20 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 315.68MiB ≤ 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:

  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".

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 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 baseline 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_idle baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle comparison 10 Crashed (exit code: 134) Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load baseline 10 Crashed (exit code: 134) Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load comparison 10 Crashed (exit code: 134) Debug Dashboard

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.

  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 0/10 replicas passed. Failed 10 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
  • 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_private_action_runner, bounds check memory_usage: 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 intake_connections: 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_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_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_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 7/10 replicas passed. Failed 3 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 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: 0/10 replicas passed. Failed 10 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.

@aiuto aiuto added the ask-review Ask in slack required teams to review this PR label Aug 11, 2026
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 4b6f43f into main Aug 12, 2026
315 of 318 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the aiuto/rfd branch August 12, 2026 16:16
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the 7.84.0 milestone Aug 12, 2026
github-actions Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 12, 2026
### What does this PR do?
Add BUILD file for tools/retry_file_dump

### Motivation
Everything should be buildable with bazel.

### Describe how you validated your changes
build and run

```
 bazel run //tools/retry_file_dump:retry_file_dump
...
INFO: Build completed successfully, 3 total actions
INFO: Running command line: /root/.cache/bazel/_bazel_root/81a15fa9a2846e82038a778136785275/execroot/_main/bazel-out/aarch64-fastbuild/bin/tools/retry_file_dump/retry_file_dump_/retry_file_dump
Invalid folder: Usage `./retry_file_dump --folder=/opt/datadog-agent/run/transactions_to_retry/c47da40ac935c8fd5ca1441a5ee3d068/`
```

Co-authored-by: tony.aiuto <tony.aiuto@datadoghq.com> 4b6f43f
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ask-review Ask in slack required teams to review this PR changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR medium review PR review might take time qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-build team/agent-metric-pipelines

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants