[ABLD-169] Pull cacerts as a a bazel module.#48075
Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom Mar 20, 2026
Merged
[ABLD-169] Pull cacerts as a a bazel module.#48075gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
aiuto
added
changelog/no-changelog
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 967586c Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | -2.67 | [-5.66, +0.32] | 1 | Logs |
Fine details of change detection per experiment
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +3.39 | [+1.81, +4.96] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative | memory utilization | +0.55 | [+0.40, +0.69] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_metrics | memory utilization | +0.42 | [+0.26, +0.58] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | +0.39 | [+0.33, +0.45] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.07 | [+0.02, +0.12] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_delta | memory utilization | +0.04 | [-0.13, +0.21] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.04, +0.12] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.38, +0.46] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.49, +0.54] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.10, +0.10] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.39, +0.39] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.21, +0.20] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.20, +0.19] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.02 | [-0.08, +0.04] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics | memory utilization | -0.05 | [-0.24, +0.14] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | docker_containers_memory | memory utilization | -0.12 | [-0.19, -0.05] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter | memory utilization | -0.14 | [-0.37, +0.09] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory utilization | -0.19 | [-0.43, +0.05] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_logs | memory utilization | -0.28 | [-0.34, -0.22] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.42 | [-0.46, -0.39] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_logs | memory utilization | -0.68 | [-0.77, -0.59] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -1.19 | [-1.33, -1.05] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | -2.67 | [-5.66, +0.32] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | observed_value | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | docker_containers_cpu | simple_check_run | 10/10 | 722 ≥ 26 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | memory_usage | 10/10 | 274.29MiB ≤ 370MiB | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | simple_check_run | 10/10 | 705 ≥ 26 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.23GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.21GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 = 3 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | 174.12MiB ≤ 175MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | 2 ≤ 3 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | 486.78MiB ≤ 550MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 4 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 204.03MiB ≤ 220MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 348.19 ≤ 2000 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 4 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 398.16MiB ≤ 475MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
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_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_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 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_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 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.
Contributor
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
29 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
On-wire sizes (compressed)
|
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 4a2a35c102
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
Expected change: - Improve the file name for the license. From: opt/datadog-agent/LICENSES/cacerts-index.815ca599c9df.txt (16.33 KiB) To: opt/datadog-agent/LICENSES/cacerts-MPL-2.0.txt (16.33 KiB) It's ugly that we pull the cert and the license from different repos, but that is what we do today, and it is more urgent to get this out of the omnibus graph than solve the attribution problems. ABLD-169 will remain open to deal with those later.
Contributor
Files inventory check summaryFile checks results against ancestor a6298b3e: Results for datadog-agent_7.79.0~devel.git.14.7113046.pipeline.103725504-1_amd64.deb:Detected file changes:
|
chouquette
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2026
Contributor
chouquette
left a comment
chouquette
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM with a couple nits/question
Comment on lines
+3
to
+10
| # There is a cron job that watches for changes to the header for the file. | ||
| # It alerts on the team-agent-build slack channel. When we get the message, | ||
| # update cacert.pem and the alert. There should be no need to rush a new | ||
| # Agent release. New keys are generally phased in, so an old root cert | ||
| # still works for a long period before its replacement is needed. | ||
| # https://app.datadoghq.com/synthetics/details/pya-ptn-xnv | ||
| # When you update this, you probably have to update the alert. | ||
| # https://app.datadoghq.com/synthetics/edit/pya-ptn-xnv?from_details=true |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure this belongs in the build file TBH
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I want that as a reminder to me and future maintainers.
The alert says the IH should do this, but it should be lower priority.
Contributor
Author
|
We both missed a typo. "embedded2/ssl" instead of "embedded3/ssl" |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
ABLD-169 Pull cacerts as a a bazel module.
Expected change:
From: opt/datadog-agent/LICENSES/cacerts-index.815ca599c9df.txt (16.33 KiB)
To: opt/datadog-agent/LICENSES/cacerts-MPL-2.0.txt (16.33 KiB)
It's ugly that we pull the cert and the license from different repos, but that is what we do today, and it is more urgent to get this out of the omnibus graph than solve the attribution problems. ABLD-169 will remain open to deal with those later.