K8s lib injection tests new scenarios

[robertomonteromiguel]

What does this PR do?

Adapt the gitlab pipeline to add the new k8s lib injection tests scenarios

Motivation:

We need to ensure the scalability of the system-tests k8s lib injection tests.
We added the new scenarios on system-tests. We changed the one pipeline and now on the tracer we need to create the test matrix with the new scenarios

Change log entry
No

Additional Notes:

How to test the change?

[github-actions]

Thank you for updating Change log entry section 👏

^{Visited at: 2025-01-09 11:52:52 UTC}

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1]

Datadog Report

Branch report: robertomonteromiguel/k8s_new_scenarios
Commit report: eaf515f
Test service: dd-trace-rb

✅ 0 Failed, 22121 Passed, 1476 Skipped, 5m 23.77s Total Time
⌛ 1 Performance Regression

⌛ Performance Regressions vs Default Branch (1)

• Rails integration tests for an application with a basic route Nested apps GET request with an event-triggering request in query string behaves like a GET 200 span is expected to eq 0 - rspec 3.58s (+2.99s, +508%) - Details

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-01-10 09:01:16

Comparing candidate commit eaf515f in PR branch robertomonteromiguel/k8s_new_scenarios with baseline commit 08041d2 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 31 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.72%. Comparing base (08041d2) to head (eaf515f).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4234      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.72%   97.72%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1354     1354              
  Lines       82450    82449       -1     
  Branches     4236     4236              
==========================================
- Hits        80578    80571       -7     
- Misses       1872     1878       +6     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[p-datadog]

I am not familiar with the tests in question, therefore I can add my checkmark on the basis of this PR not obviously affecting the rest of dd-trace-rb in a negative way but I cannot tell whether the changes do test everything correctly.

The tests also look like they are stuck.

[robertomonteromiguel]

The tests also look like they are stuck.

https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-rb/-/pipelines/52523725

I can't merge the PR: "The base branch restricts merging to authorized users. "

[ivoanjo]

These 3 tests seem to be completely stuck and I've not seen this in master so they do seem to be caused by this PR:

@robertomonteromiguel can you check what's up there?

[robertomonteromiguel]

These 3 tests seem to be completely stuck and I've not seen this in master so they do seem to be caused by this PR:

@robertomonteromiguel can you check what's up there?

@ivoanjo I can't access to your repository settings, but I seems that there are specific requirements for merge a PR. These requirements are pointed to the jobs that not longer exists. You need to change them to the new scenarios/jobs on ruby. Ping me if you need help to do that.

[robertomonteromiguel]

These 3 tests seem to be completely stuck and I've not seen this in master so they do seem to be caused by this PR:

@robertomonteromiguel can you check what's up there?

@ivoanjo I can't access to your repository settings, but I seems that there are specific requirements for merge a PR. These requirements are pointed to the jobs that not longer exists. You need to change them to the new scenarios/jobs on ruby. Ping me if you need help to do that.

Here an example of system-tests repository requirements:

[ivoanjo]

@ivoanjo I can't access to your repository settings, but I seems that there are specific requirements for merge a PR. These requirements are pointed to the jobs that not longer exists. You need to change them to the new scenarios/jobs on ruby. Ping me if you need help to do that.

Ahh right, this has happened to me before -- github couples on the exact names of the tests and so if we change it a bit (like we're doing here) then GitHub gets really confused.

Two notes:

1. Since now we have many separate tests, do you have any recommendations on making sure that they are all green? E.g. is there a single step we can rely on that runs after all these or something like that?

2. I've gone ahead and removed these tests from the require list to unblock this PR:

• dd-gitlab/onboarding_tests_k8s_injection: [dd-lib-ruby-init-test-rails-explicit]
• dd-gitlab/onboarding_tests_k8s_injection: [dd-lib-ruby-init-test-rails-gemsrb]
• dd-gitlab/onboarding_tests_k8s_injection: [dd-lib-ruby-init-test-rails]

[robertomonteromiguel]

1. we can rely on that runs after all the

I still don't have a clear idea of how to manage this. The same thing happens with other tracers and with the other onboarding tests.
I had the same problem a couple of months ago, with other tests in another repository.
It is painful to rename a test scenario or create a new one. Since you have to add it in all tracers, and also these checks are different in each repository, and I don't have permissions to modify these checks in the repositories either.
Let me discuss it with the team, to try to come up with a definitive solution that applies to all tracers.

[ivoanjo]

Let me discuss it with the team, to try to come up with a definitive solution that applies to all tracers.

Awesome, thank you, looking forward to it :)