Skip to content

Ekump/test oom benchmarks issue#2209

Draft
ekump wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
ekump/test-oom-benchmarks-issue
Draft

Ekump/test oom benchmarks issue#2209
ekump wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
ekump/test-oom-benchmarks-issue

Conversation

@ekump

@ekump ekump commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

DO NOT MERGE

What does this PR do?

A brief description of the change being made with this pull request.

Motivation

What inspired you to submit this pull request?

Additional Notes

Anything else we should know when reviewing?

How to test the change?

Describe here in detail how the change can be validated.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Clippy Allow Annotation Report

Comparing clippy allow annotations between branches:

Summary by Rule

Rule Base Branch PR Branch Change

Annotation Counts by File

File Base Branch PR Branch Change

Annotation Stats by Crate

Crate Base Branch PR Branch Change
clippy-annotation-reporter 5 5 No change (0%)
datadog-ffe-ffi 1 1 No change (0%)
datadog-ipc 22 22 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger 4 4 No change (0%)
datadog-live-debugger-ffi 10 10 No change (0%)
datadog-profiling-replayer 4 4 No change (0%)
datadog-sidecar 45 45 No change (0%)
libdd-common 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-common-ffi 12 12 No change (0%)
libdd-data-pipeline 6 6 No change (0%)
libdd-ddsketch 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-dogstatsd-client 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-profiling 13 13 No change (0%)
libdd-remote-config 3 3 No change (0%)
libdd-telemetry 20 20 No change (0%)
libdd-tinybytes 4 4 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-normalization 2 2 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-obfuscation 3 3 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-stats 1 1 No change (0%)
libdd-trace-utils 11 11 No change (0%)
Total 182 182 No change (0%)

About This Report

This report tracks Clippy allow annotations for specific rules, showing how they've changed in this PR. Decreasing the number of these annotations generally improves code quality.

@datadog-official

datadog-official Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pipelines

Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

Required checks pass | allchecks   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

pr-name | pr_name_lint   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

ℹ️ Info

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 74.34% (-0.07%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: a063c12 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

Base automatically changed from ekump/APMSP-3628-only-run-perf-bench-for-impacted-crates to main July 7, 2026 21:10
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 85.89 MB 85.89 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 7.88 MB 7.88 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 97.11 MB 97.11 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.61 MB 10.61 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
libdatadog-x64-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 25.45 MB 25.45 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 88.44 KB 88.44 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 184.54 MB 184.54 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 946.77 MB 946.77 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 8.32 MB 8.32 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 88.44 KB 88.44 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 24.62 MB 24.62 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 49.03 MB 49.03 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
libdatadog-x86-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 22.05 MB 22.05 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 89.82 KB 89.82 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 188.76 MB 188.76 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 935.45 MB 935.45 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 6.43 MB 6.43 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 89.82 KB 89.82 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 26.43 MB 26.43 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 46.66 MB 46.66 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
x86_64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 76.59 MB 76.59 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 8.78 MB 8.78 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 92.11 MB 92.11 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.70 MB 10.70 MB 0% (0 B) 👌

@ekump ekump closed this Jul 8, 2026
@ekump ekump force-pushed the ekump/test-oom-benchmarks-issue branch from ad38c2d to f9ac7f2 Compare July 8, 2026 20:40
@ekump ekump reopened this Jul 8, 2026
@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Comparison

Benchmark execution time: 2026-07-09 18:19:37

Comparing candidate commit a063c12 in PR branch ekump/test-oom-benchmarks-issue with baseline commit e026a3c in branch main.

Found 1 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 126 metrics, 0 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:normalization/normalize_trace/test_trace

  • 🟩 execution_time [-48.995ns; -45.063ns] or [-16.211%; -14.910%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/16

  • 🟥 execution_time [+11.258ns; +14.005ns] or [+4.774%; +5.939%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-3712643.607op/s; -2984063.462op/s] or [-5.472%; -4.398%]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-07-09 18:25:52

Comparing candidate commit a063c12 in PR branch ekump/test-oom-benchmarks-issue with baseline commit e026a3c in branch main.

Found 4 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 143 metrics, 10 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:ddsketch_read/ordered_bins/clustered_near_zero

  • 🟩 execution_time [-403.315ns; -400.390ns] or [-6.784%; -6.734%]

scenario:ddsketch_read/ordered_bins/collapsing

  • 🟩 execution_time [-1.757µs; -1.744µs] or [-6.643%; -6.592%]

scenario:ddsketch_read/ordered_bins/large_values

  • 🟩 execution_time [-544.285ns; -541.338ns] or [-7.140%; -7.101%]

scenario:ddsketch_read/ordered_bins/mixed

  • 🟩 execution_time [-772.843ns; -768.020ns] or [-6.634%; -6.593%]

scenario:profiles_dictionary/profile_string_inserts/threads/1

  • 🟥 execution_time [+14.136µs; +17.146µs] or [+4.676%; +5.672%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-182678.405op/s; -150585.026op/s] or [-5.393%; -4.446%]

Candidate

Omitted due to size.

Baseline

Omitted due to size.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant