Reapply "Add Google Protobuf Instrumentation" by vandonr · Pull Request #6647 · DataDog/dd-trace-dotnet

vandonr · 2025-02-10T12:26:34Z

Summary of changes

same as #6166 except with:

fixes by @bouwkast from Attempt to fix Samples.GoogleProtobuf errors #6640
gave up on generating the proto object file on the fly
fixed a couple inconsistency issues I discovered when system-testing vs the Java instrumentation (depth calculation was one-off, int value of types were not in sync, and we were not using the full name for references)

This reverts commit 344c304.

datadog-ddstaging · 2025-02-10T13:05:32Z

Datadog Report

Branch report: vandonr/proto
Commit report: eb78da2
Test service: dd-trace-dotnet

✅ 0 Failed, 570476 Passed, 5469 Skipped, 45h 58m 33.39s Total Time

andrewlock · 2025-02-10T14:47:40Z

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing the following branches/commits:

Execution-time benchmarks measure the whole time it takes to execute a program. And are intended to measure the one-off costs. Cases where the execution time results for the PR are worse than latest master results are shown in red. The following thresholds were used for comparing the execution times:

Welch test with statistical test for significance of 5%
Only results indicating a difference greater than 5% and 5 ms are considered.

Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see the dashboard.

Graphs show the p99 interval based on the mean and StdDev of the test run, as well as the mean value of the run (shown as a diamond below the graph).

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (71ms)  : 62, 81
     .   : milestone, 71,
    master - mean (69ms)  : 65, 73
     .   : milestone, 69,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (1,015ms)  : 956, 1074
     .   : milestone, 1015,
    master - mean (1,001ms)  : 978, 1024
     .   : milestone, 1001,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (103ms)  : 101, 105
     .   : milestone, 103,
    master - mean (102ms)  : 100, 105
     .   : milestone, 102,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (679ms)  : 659, 698
     .   : milestone, 679,
    master - mean (676ms)  : 659, 693
     .   : milestone, 676,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (90ms)  : 87, 92
     .   : milestone, 90,
    master - mean (89ms)  : 87, 91
     .   : milestone, 89,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (631ms)  : 611, 651
     .   : milestone, 631,
    master - mean (632ms)  : 616, 648
     .   : milestone, 632,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (191ms)  : 185, 197
     .   : milestone, 191,
    master - mean (191ms)  : 187, 195
     .   : milestone, 191,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (1,105ms)  : 1074, 1135
     .   : milestone, 1105,
    master - mean (1,108ms)  : 1072, 1144
     .   : milestone, 1108,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (271ms)  : 266, 276
     .   : milestone, 271,
    master - mean (270ms)  : 264, 276
     .   : milestone, 270,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (862ms)  : 832, 892
     .   : milestone, 862,
    master - mean (863ms)  : 834, 892
     .   : milestone, 863,

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6647) - mean (263ms)  : 259, 267
     .   : milestone, 263,
    master - mean (263ms)  : 259, 267
     .   : milestone, 263,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6647) - mean (839ms)  : 810, 868
     .   : milestone, 839,
    master - mean (844ms)  : 806, 882
     .   : milestone, 844,

bouwkast

Looks like some merge conflicts

andrewlock · 2025-02-10T15:26:11Z

Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌

Benchmarks for #6647 compared to master:

2 benchmarks are faster, with geometric mean 1.207
1 benchmarks are slower, with geometric mean 1.126
All benchmarks have the same allocations

The following thresholds were used for comparing the benchmark speeds:

Mann–Whitney U test with statistical test for significance of 5%
Only results indicating a difference greater than 10% and 0.3 ns are considered.

Allocation changes below 0.5% are ignored.

Benchmark details

Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
master	`StartStopWithChild`	net6.0	7.86μs	43ns	262ns	0.0203	0.00811	0	5.61 KB
master	`StartStopWithChild`	netcoreapp3.1	10.1μs	55.5ns	324ns	0.0199	0.00996	0	5.8 KB
master	`StartStopWithChild`	net472	15.9μs	38.1ns	142ns	1.04	0.307	0.0944	6.21 KB
#6647	`StartStopWithChild`	net6.0	7.8μs	39.4ns	172ns	0.0167	0.00833	0	5.61 KB
#6647	`StartStopWithChild`	netcoreapp3.1	9.81μs	52.1ns	299ns	0.0285	0.0143	0	5.8 KB
#6647	`StartStopWithChild`	net472	15.9μs	44.8ns	173ns	1.05	0.318	0.0932	6.22 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	492μs	486ns	1.82μs	0	2.7 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	700μs	282ns	1.05μs	0	2.7 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	848μs	626ns	2.34μs	0.422	3.3 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	480μs	399ns	1.54μs	0	2.7 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	673μs	496ns	1.92μs	0	2.7 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	847μs	501ns	1.94μs	0.422	3.3 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendRequest`	net6.0	132μs	417ns	1.61μs	0.135	14.47 KB
master	`SendRequest`	netcoreapp3.1	147μs	396ns	1.53μs	0.22	17.27 KB
master	`SendRequest`	net472	0.00199ns	0.000288ns	0.00112ns	0	0 b
#6647	`SendRequest`	net6.0	131μs	554ns	2.14μs	0.131	14.47 KB
#6647	`SendRequest`	netcoreapp3.1	152μs	127ns	474ns	0.229	17.27 KB
#6647	`SendRequest`	net472	0.000395ns	0.000212ns	0.000822ns	0	0 b

Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Gen 2	Allocated
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	608μs	3.32μs	18.8μs	0.604	0	0	41.87 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	670μs	3.78μs	27.5μs	0.338	0	0	41.69 KB
master	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	840μs	2.83μs	10.6μs	8.22	2.47	0.411	53.34 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net6.0	573μs	3.13μs	22.6μs	0.556	0	0	41.72 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	netcoreapp3.1	673μs	3.88μs	30.8μs	0.349	0	0	41.82 KB
#6647	`WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces`	net472	841μs	3.14μs	12.1μs	8.22	2.47	0.411	53.29 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.DbCommandBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Allocated
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net6.0	1.44μs	2.09ns	8.1ns	0.0138	0	1.02 KB
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	netcoreapp3.1	1.75μs	2.38ns	9.22ns	0.0139	0	1.02 KB
master	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net472	2.07μs	4.15ns	16.1ns	0.156	0.00103	987 B
#6647	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net6.0	1.35μs	1.25ns	4.83ns	0.0142	0	1.02 KB
#6647	`ExecuteNonQuery`	netcoreapp3.1	1.86μs	2.26ns	8.75ns	0.0138	0	1.02 KB
#6647	`ExecuteNonQuery`	net472	1.99μs	1.26ns	4.87ns	0.156	0.000988	987 B

Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`CallElasticsearch`	net6.0	1.21μs	0.404ns	1.51ns	0.0139	976 B
master	`CallElasticsearch`	netcoreapp3.1	1.5μs	0.958ns	3.59ns	0.0128	976 B
master	`CallElasticsearch`	net472	2.46μs	2.36ns	9.14ns	0.158	995 B
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net6.0	1.37μs	1.01ns	3.76ns	0.013	952 B
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.71μs	0.965ns	3.61ns	0.0139	1.02 KB
master	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net472	2.67μs	1.97ns	7.63ns	0.166	1.05 KB
#6647	`CallElasticsearch`	net6.0	1.2μs	0.765ns	2.96ns	0.0133	976 B
#6647	`CallElasticsearch`	netcoreapp3.1	1.54μs	1.02ns	3.83ns	0.0132	976 B
#6647	`CallElasticsearch`	net472	2.49μs	2.6ns	10.1ns	0.158	995 B
#6647	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net6.0	1.29μs	0.713ns	2.67ns	0.0136	952 B
#6647	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.68μs	0.985ns	3.55ns	0.0141	1.02 KB
#6647	`CallElasticsearchAsync`	net472	2.7μs	1.41ns	5.27ns	0.167	1.05 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`ExecuteAsync`	net6.0	1.44μs	1.02ns	3.96ns	0.013	952 B
master	`ExecuteAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.71μs	0.954ns	3.7ns	0.012	952 B
master	`ExecuteAsync`	net472	1.86μs	0.559ns	2.09ns	0.145	915 B
#6647	`ExecuteAsync`	net6.0	1.35μs	1.91ns	7.4ns	0.0135	952 B
#6647	`ExecuteAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	1.68μs	0.282ns	1.02ns	0.0126	952 B
#6647	`ExecuteAsync`	net472	1.85μs	1.07ns	4.14ns	0.145	915 B

Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendAsync`	net6.0	4.41μs	1.19ns	4.47ns	0.0331	2.31 KB
master	`SendAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	5.35μs	3.47ns	13ns	0.0374	2.85 KB
master	`SendAsync`	net472	7.37μs	2.03ns	7.85ns	0.495	3.12 KB
#6647	`SendAsync`	net6.0	4.38μs	1.29ns	4.82ns	0.0307	2.31 KB
#6647	`SendAsync`	netcoreapp3.1	5.28μs	2.84ns	11ns	0.0395	2.85 KB
#6647	`SendAsync`	net472	7.43μs	1.82ns	7.06ns	0.495	3.12 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	1.58μs	0.493ns	1.78ns	0.023	1.64 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	2.19μs	1.07ns	3.99ns	0.0228	1.64 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	2.67μs	4.35ns	16.9ns	0.25	1.57 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	1.54μs	0.515ns	1.93ns	0.0233	1.64 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	2.16μs	1.22ns	4.57ns	0.0219	1.64 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net472	2.63μs	1.26ns	4.89ns	0.249	1.57 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Gen 1	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	112μs	212ns	822ns	0.0558	0	4.28 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	117μs	148ns	573ns	0.0582	0	4.28 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	151μs	82.1ns	307ns	0.681	0.227	4.46 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	114μs	299ns	1.16μs	0.0566	0	4.28 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	118μs	192ns	742ns	0.0581	0	4.28 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net472	149μs	186ns	720ns	0.669	0.223	4.46 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.NLogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	3.11μs	0.496ns	1.72ns	0.0311	2.2 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	4.2μs	2.35ns	8.79ns	0.0294	2.2 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	5.03μs	1.01ns	3.79ns	0.32	2.02 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	3.13μs	0.888ns	3.44ns	0.0313	2.2 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	4.13μs	1.53ns	5.73ns	0.0289	2.2 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.8μs	1.63ns	5.87ns	0.32	2.02 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`SendReceive`	net6.0	1.27μs	0.38ns	1.47ns	0.0159	1.14 KB
master	`SendReceive`	netcoreapp3.1	1.77μs	0.486ns	1.68ns	0.015	1.14 KB
master	`SendReceive`	net472	2.12μs	2.85ns	11.1ns	0.183	1.16 KB
#6647	`SendReceive`	net6.0	1.32μs	0.429ns	1.55ns	0.0159	1.14 KB
#6647	`SendReceive`	netcoreapp3.1	1.68μs	0.911ns	3.53ns	0.0152	1.14 KB
#6647	`SendReceive`	net472	2.07μs	0.682ns	2.64ns	0.184	1.16 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.77μs	1.19ns	4.44ns	0.022	1.6 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	3.97μs	5.6ns	20.9ns	0.0217	1.65 KB
master	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.3μs	3.26ns	12.6ns	0.323	2.04 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net6.0	2.8μs	3.22ns	12.5ns	0.0225	1.6 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	netcoreapp3.1	3.77μs	1.03ns	3.98ns	0.0228	1.65 KB
#6647	`EnrichedLog`	net472	4.28μs	3.8ns	14.7ns	0.322	2.04 KB

Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark - Slower ⚠️ Same allocations ✔️

Slower ⚠️ in #6647

Benchmark	diff/base	Base Median (ns)	Diff Median (ns)	Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan‑netcoreapp3.1	1.126	557.60	627.92

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`StartFinishSpan`	net6.0	391ns	0.461ns	1.79ns	0.00817	576 B
master	`StartFinishSpan`	netcoreapp3.1	557ns	0.82ns	3.18ns	0.00784	576 B
master	`StartFinishSpan`	net472	584ns	1.27ns	4.91ns	0.0915	578 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	net6.0	515ns	0.487ns	1.89ns	0.00983	696 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	netcoreapp3.1	742ns	1.68ns	6.07ns	0.00932	696 B
master	`StartFinishScope`	net472	839ns	2.27ns	8.78ns	0.105	658 B
#6647	`StartFinishSpan`	net6.0	391ns	0.637ns	2.47ns	0.00817	576 B
#6647	`StartFinishSpan`	netcoreapp3.1	629ns	1.08ns	4.19ns	0.0079	576 B
#6647	`StartFinishSpan`	net472	626ns	1.4ns	5.26ns	0.0917	578 B
#6647	`StartFinishScope`	net6.0	502ns	0.829ns	3.1ns	0.00992	696 B
#6647	`StartFinishScope`	netcoreapp3.1	698ns	1.69ns	6.09ns	0.00936	696 B
#6647	`StartFinishScope`	net472	778ns	1.96ns	7.58ns	0.104	658 B

Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark - Faster 🎉 Same allocations ✔️

Faster 🎉 in #6647

Benchmark	base/diff	Base Median (ns)	Diff Median (ns)	Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin‑net472	1.239	1,162.68	938.31
Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin‑net6.0	1.175	731.18	622.02

Raw results

Branch	Method	Toolchain	Mean	StdError	StdDev	Gen 0	Allocated
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net6.0	733ns	1.3ns	5.05ns	0.00951	696 B
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	netcoreapp3.1	907ns	1.48ns	5.73ns	0.00936	696 B
master	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net472	1.16μs	1.52ns	5.88ns	0.105	658 B
#6647	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net6.0	623ns	1.2ns	4.66ns	0.00979	696 B
#6647	`RunOnMethodBegin`	netcoreapp3.1	955ns	1.97ns	7.64ns	0.00915	696 B
#6647	`RunOnMethodBegin`	net472	940ns	3.23ns	11.6ns	0.104	658 B

This reverts commit d7349fe.

bouwkast

LGTM just reviewed the new changes as the rest was already reviewed previously

## Summary of changes Attempts to remove the Protobuf Schema tagging instrumentation that was recently added in #6647 Recommended to revert this PR when we do the fix. ## Reason for change Appears to be throwing errors due to MissingMethodExceptions on the DuckTypes. We need time to investigate it and fix. This seems to be the simplest approach as there were multiple PRs. I don't see any code that hits this now so should be good. Additionally, the Sample project is very flaky I attempted to remove that code generating the proto file. ## Implementation details - Comment out instrumented method attributes to disable instrumentations and leave them there for less confusion (maybe?) - Remove Proto file generation in sample which I think is the cause of the CI build error - Skip tests in CI. ## Test coverage - Skipped now. ## Other details

@bouwkast

## Summary of changes same as #6166 except with: - fixes by @bouwkast from #6640 - gave up on generating the proto object file on the fly - fixed a couple inconsistency issues I discovered when system-testing vs the Java instrumentation (depth calculation was one-off, int value of types were not in sync, and we were not using the full name for references) --------- Co-authored-by: Steven Bouwkamp <steven.bouwkamp@datadoghq.com>

@bouwkast

## Summary of changes same as #6166 except with: - fixes by @bouwkast from #6640 - gave up on generating the proto object file on the fly - fixed a couple inconsistency issues I discovered when system-testing vs the Java instrumentation (depth calculation was one-off, int value of types were not in sync, and we were not using the full name for references) --------- Co-authored-by: Steven Bouwkamp <steven.bouwkamp@datadoghq.com>

## Summary of changes Attempts to remove the Protobuf Schema tagging instrumentation that was recently added in #6647 Recommended to revert this PR when we do the fix. ## Reason for change Appears to be throwing errors due to MissingMethodExceptions on the DuckTypes. We need time to investigate it and fix. This seems to be the simplest approach as there were multiple PRs. I don't see any code that hits this now so should be good. Additionally, the Sample project is very flaky I attempted to remove that code generating the proto file. ## Implementation details - Comment out instrumented method attributes to disable instrumentations and leave them there for less confusion (maybe?) - Remove Proto file generation in sample which I think is the cause of the CI build error - Skip tests in CI. ## Test coverage - Skipped now. ## Other details

vandonr and others added 4 commits February 10, 2025 13:06

Reapply "Add Google Protobuf Instrumentation (#6166)"

92cbb4a

This reverts commit 344c304.

Add shared sample helper to Samples.GoogleProtobuf

cc3af18

Run GeneratePackageVersions -IncludePackages Google.Protobuf

ac590fb

commit cs file generated from proto

8e40db0

vandonr requested review from a team as code owners February 10, 2025 12:26

vandonr mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2025

Attempt to fix Samples.GoogleProtobuf errors #6640

Closed

add trailing slashes for windows

f41bd25

bouwkast reviewed Feb 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

vandonr added 2 commits February 11, 2025 11:56

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into vandonr/proto

eb78da2

fix inconsistency with java

ed0bdfb

vandonr marked this pull request as draft February 13, 2025 09:37

vandonr added 3 commits February 13, 2025 10:38

some debug code to build in the CI

d7349fe

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into vandonr/proto

4c632a2

fix type values and name used for hash

d45d715

vandonr force-pushed the vandonr/proto branch from ac641f8 to d45d715 Compare February 18, 2025 15:20

vandonr added 2 commits February 18, 2025 17:26

use full name for schema name

707274a

Revert "some debug code to build in the CI"

4013f3d

This reverts commit d7349fe.

vandonr marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2025 16:35

vandonr mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2025

Protobuf system test for schema tracking DataDog/system-tests#4044

Merged

7 tasks

save full name + update snapshots

8c086b9

bouwkast approved these changes Feb 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

vandonr merged commit 3552149 into master Feb 20, 2025

vandonr deleted the vandonr/proto branch February 20, 2025 16:18

github-actions Bot added this to the vNext-v3 milestone Feb 20, 2025

andrewlock added the area:automatic-instrumentation Automatic instrumentation managed C# code (Datadog.Trace.ClrProfiler.Managed) label Feb 24, 2025

andrewlock added area:data-streams-monitoring area:integrations type:new-feature labels Feb 24, 2025

bouwkast mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2025

Remove instrumentation for Protobuf Schema tagging #6792

Merged

Conversation

vandonr commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary of changes

Uh oh!

datadog-ddstaging Bot commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Datadog Report

Uh oh!

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Uh oh!

bouwkast left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌

Benchmark details

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Raw results

Slower ⚠️ in #6647

Raw results

Faster 🎉 in #6647

Raw results

Uh oh!

bouwkast left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

vandonr commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

datadog-ddstaging Bot commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

andrewlock commented Feb 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading