Skip to content

Address TestMemHigh flakiness: widen GC slack to 1%#52025

Open
rdesgroppes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
regis.desgroppes/fix-watchdog-test-flake
Open

Address TestMemHigh flakiness: widen GC slack to 1%#52025
rdesgroppes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
regis.desgroppes/fix-watchdog-test-flake

Conversation

@rdesgroppes

@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Widen the GC jitter slack in doTestMemHigh from 0.1% (n/1000) to 1% (n/100).

Motivation

The delta assertion (m.Alloc - oldM.Alloc + slack >= n) fails when GC reclaims more than slack bytes between the two ReadMemStats calls.

The CI binary imports many more packages than a local build, producing a ~2.3 MB heap baseline vs ~450 KB locally.
GC reclaims a roughly constant fraction of that baseline, so the absolute reclamation scales with it.
With the earlier 0.1% slack (10'000B for n=10MB), the observed reclamation of 11'256B exceeds the budget and the test fails intermittently (eg#1, eg#2):

INFO: From Testing //pkg/trace/watchdog:watchdog_test:
==================== Test output for //pkg/trace/watchdog:watchdog_test:
--- FAIL: TestMemHigh (2.01s)
    info_test.go:123: Mem (100000 bytes): {2451328} {2558080}
    info_test.go:123: Mem (10000000 bytes): {2451808} {12440552}
    info_test.go:128:
        	Error Trace:	pkg/trace/watchdog/info_test.go:128
        	            				pkg/trace/watchdog/info_test.go:137
        	Error:      	"9998744" is not greater than or equal to "10000000"
        	Test:       	TestMemHigh
        	Messages:   	not enough bytes allocated since last call
FAIL
================================================================================

Widening to 1% (100'000B) clears the largest observed gap by almost an order of magnitude.

Describe how you validated your changes

Standalone harness reproducing CI-like conditions (2MB live baseline, GOGC=1):

go test -tags test -run TestMemHigh ./pkg/trace/watchdog
  • old slack n/1000 = 10'000: 1/50 failed (gap 38'008 > 10'000)
  • new slack n/100 = 100'000: 0/50 failed (gap 38'008 < 100'000)

### What does this PR do?
Widen the GC jitter slack in `doTestMemHigh` from 0.1% (`n/1000`) to 1%
(`n/100`).

### Motivation
The delta assertion (`m.Alloc - oldM.Alloc + slack >= n`) fails when GC
reclaims more than slack bytes between the two `ReadMemStats` calls.

The CI binary imports many more packages than a local build, producing a
~2.3 MB heap baseline vs ~450 KB locally.
GC reclaims a roughly constant fraction of that baseline, so the
absolute reclamation scales with it.
With the earlier 0.1% slack (10'000B for n=10MB), the observed
reclamation of 11'256B exceeds the budget and the test fails
intermittently
([example](https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/jobs/1754612366#L1577)):
```
INFO: From Testing //pkg/trace/watchdog:watchdog_test:
==================== Test output for //pkg/trace/watchdog:watchdog_test:
--- FAIL: TestMemHigh (2.01s)
    info_test.go:123: Mem (100000 bytes): {2451328} {2558080}
    info_test.go:123: Mem (10000000 bytes): {2451808} {12440552}
    info_test.go:128:
        	Error Trace:	pkg/trace/watchdog/info_test.go:128
        	            				pkg/trace/watchdog/info_test.go:137
        	Error:      	"9998744" is not greater than or equal to "10000000"
        	Test:       	TestMemHigh
        	Messages:   	not enough bytes allocated since last call
FAIL
================================================================================
```

Widening to 1% (100'000B) clears the largest observed gap by almost an
order of magnitude.

### Describe how you validated your changes
Standalone harness reproducing CI-like conditions (2MB live baseline,
`GOGC=1`):
```
go test -tags test -run TestMemHigh ./pkg/trace/watchdog
```
- old slack `n/1000` = 10'000: 1/50 failed (gap 38'008 > 10'000)
- new slack `n/100` = 100'000: 0/50 failed (gap 38'008 < 100'000)
@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Jun 9, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Jun 9, 2026
@datadog-prod-us1-5

datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Pipelines

Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 1 Pipeline job failed

DataDog/datadog-agent | oracle: [21.3.0-xe]   View in Datadog   GitLab

ℹ️ Info

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 50.73% (+0.01%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

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

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added internal Identify a non-fork PR team/agent-apm trace-agent labels Jun 9, 2026
@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes marked this pull request as ready for review June 9, 2026 14:59
@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes requested a review from a team as a code owner June 9, 2026 14:59
@github-actions github-actions Bot deleted a comment from chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Jun 9, 2026
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 2e9ccff8:

Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~devel.git.638.fcbfaab.pipeline.117801795-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 2e9ccff
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

32 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 751.652 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 707.423 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 310.320 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 751.636 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 707.407 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 727.039 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 686.558 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 751.636 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 707.407 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 727.039 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 686.558 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 811.080 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 811.512 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1002.021 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 991.106 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 209.753 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 222.847 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.447 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.877 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.841 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.946 MiB
docker_host_profiler_amd64 304.525 MiB
docker_host_profiler_arm64 315.638 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 30.502 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.499 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 30.502 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 30.502 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 45.762 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 42.472 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 43.270 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 45.762 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 45.761 MiB

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: a43d9076-7901-4188-97cc-5a615d2e272f

Baseline: 35f1ff3
Comparison: fcbfaab
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_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.13 [+0.09, +0.17] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.07 [+0.02, +0.13] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization -1.10 [-1.36, -0.83] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -1.37 [-2.43, -0.31] 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 10/10 145.90MiB ≤ 147MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 732.73KiB ≤ 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 10/10 494.86MiB ≤ 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 10/10 177.93MiB ≤ 195MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 264.43MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 347.80 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 400.85MiB ≤ 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

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

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Passed. All Quality Gates 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 intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 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.
  • 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_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_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_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/agent-apm trace-agent

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants