Skip to content

feat: collect service source in client stats#4519

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
raphael/stats_src
Mar 20, 2026
Merged

feat: collect service source in client stats#4519
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
raphael/stats_src

Conversation

@raphaelgavache

@raphaelgavache raphaelgavache commented Mar 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Bump agent dependency version to collect service source in client stats, following this change to set the tag in tracer

This PR consists only of dependencies update

  • a test file to assert client stats service source field
Screenshot 2026-03-09 at 23 59 35

Motivation

Reviewer's Checklist

  • Changed code has unit tests for its functionality at or near 100% coverage.
  • System-Tests covering this feature have been added and enabled with the va.b.c-dev version tag.
  • There is a benchmark for any new code, or changes to existing code.
  • If this interacts with the agent in a new way, a system test has been added.
  • New code is free of linting errors. You can check this by running make lint locally.
  • New code doesn't break existing tests. You can check this by running make test locally.
  • Add an appropriate team label so this PR gets put in the right place for the release notes.
  • All generated files are up to date. You can check this by running make generate locally.
  • Non-trivial go.mod changes, e.g. adding new modules, are reviewed by @DataDog/dd-trace-go-guild. Make sure all nested modules are up to date by running make fix-modules locally.

Unsure? Have a question? Request a review!

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.22%. Comparing base (516cca3) to head (7633c1a).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
internal/stacktrace/contribs_generated.go 100.00% <ø> (ø)

... and 437 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 59.45% (+3.59%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 7633c1a | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Was this helpful? React with 👍/👎 or give us feedback!

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-03-20 19:22:49

Comparing candidate commit 7633c1a in PR branch raphael/stats_src with baseline commit 516cca3 in branch main.

Found 2 performance improvements and 1 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 213 metrics, 8 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

  • 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
  • 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:BenchmarkLogs/simple-25

  • 🟩 execution_time [-15.105ns; -9.135ns] or [-3.361%; -2.032%]

scenario:BenchmarkParallelMetrics/gauge/get-handle-25

  • 🟩 execution_time [-14.612ns; -3.840ns] or [-11.948%; -3.140%]

scenario:BenchmarkTracerAddSpans-25

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+48 bytes; +48 bytes] or [+2.150%; +2.150%]

@raphaelgavache raphaelgavache requested a review from a team as a code owner March 10, 2026 03:49
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the apm:ecosystem contrib/* related feature requests or bugs label Mar 10, 2026
Base automatically changed from raphael/srv_src to main March 12, 2026 19:17
@raphaelgavache raphaelgavache force-pushed the raphael/stats_src branch 3 times, most recently from efcc81a to b612e4b Compare March 18, 2026 17:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants