-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
[NPM-4131] Add netpath aggregator + e2e test #33416
Conversation
// on error, the flare output is in the error message | ||
flareCommandOutput = strings.Join([]string{flareCommandOutput, err.Error()}, "\n") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure if this is the correct fix, but new-e2e was panicking here which was interfering with pulumi destroy. Let me know if this should be changed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh yeah that should help. We were aware of the issue but did not check to fix it yet.
Thanks for the fix
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 88a6d21 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +1.14 | [+1.07, +1.21] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.77 | [-0.14, +1.68] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.40 | [-0.39, +1.18] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.23 | [+0.17, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.07 | [-0.40, +0.53] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.87, +0.93] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.26, +0.30] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.76, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.63, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.03, +0.03] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.90, +0.88] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.77, +0.73] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.93, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.18 | [-0.24, -0.12] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.49 | [-0.55, -0.43] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -2.38 | [-5.33, +0.57] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_idle | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
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:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
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.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 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 intake_connections: 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.
test/new-e2e/tests/netpath/network-path-integration/fixtures/local-mock/fake_router_setup.sh
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/new-e2e/tests/netpath/network-path-integration/local_mock_traceroute_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/new-e2e/tests/netpath/network-path-integration/local_mock_traceroute_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
97b51dc
to
435b8f1
Compare
c1358cc
to
f625581
Compare
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=54381935 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit 3d784ff |
3ac99ad
to
3d784ff
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
This PR adds an e2e test for network path as well as the prerequisites (mainly, a fakeintake aggregator for netpath).
It mocks a traceroute by setting up two veth pairs that get routed in a network namespace (implemented in
fake_router_setup.sh
). In that sense, it's a real traceroute it's testing against, it just comes back with the same result every time since it's a fixed network topology.Stacked on top of [NPM-4131] Use module for network path payload
Motivation
First e2e test that properly checks the payload, also enables us to validate that traceroute functions correctly for both TCP and UDP
Describe how you validated your changes
After going through e2e setup:
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Something is weird about the go.mod versions, I don't think this can be merged as-is and it needs some sort of fix.
Additional Notes