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

[Backport 7.59.x] [CWS] Reset rule disarmers only after a new ruleset is loaded #30045

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 11, 2024

Conversation

agent-platform-auto-pr[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

Backport f4e705e from #30030.


What does this PR do?

This makes sure rule disarmers are reset only after the rule engine starts evaluating a new ruleset.
Prior to this change, rule disarmers were reset before the old and new rulesets were swapped, causing the actions of old rules to be performed again for a short period of time.

Motivation

Describe how to test/QA your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@agent-platform-auto-pr agent-platform-auto-pr bot requested a review from a team as a code owner October 11, 2024 10:07
@agent-platform-auto-pr agent-platform-auto-pr bot added component/system-probe team/agent-security qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests backport bot labels Oct 11, 2024
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Oct 11, 2024

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=46378389 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit b403c11

Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Oct 11, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 10638f43-7952-47b9-93f8-ef0eec45b992 Metrics dashboard Target profiles

Baseline: e1d5a54
Comparison: b403c11

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +1.06 [+1.01, +1.11] 1 Logs
idle_all_features memory utilization +0.40 [+0.31, +0.50] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +0.34 [-0.39, +1.08] 1 Logs
idle memory utilization +0.18 [+0.13, +0.23] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.01 [-0.10, +0.09] 1 Logs
pycheck_lots_of_tags % cpu utilization -0.08 [-2.49, +2.34] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.26 [-0.38, -0.15] 1 Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput -0.64 [-1.44, +0.17] 1 Logs
basic_py_check % cpu utilization -1.55 [-4.18, +1.08] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed
idle memory_usage 10/10

Explanation

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".

@YoannGh
Copy link
Contributor

YoannGh commented Oct 11, 2024

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Oct 11, 2024

🚂 MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in 7.59.x is 26m.

Use /merge -c to cancel this operation!

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 3f1eae2 into 7.59.x Oct 11, 2024
221 of 223 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the backport-30030-to-7.59.x branch October 11, 2024 13:23
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 7.59.0 milestone Oct 11, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport bot changelog/no-changelog component/system-probe qa/done Skip QA week as QA was done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/agent-security
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants