Skip to content

Fix protocol failures caused by empty appsec data - #4216

Open
cataphract wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
glopes/empty-data-appsec
Open

cataphract wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
glopes/empty-data-appsec

Conversation

@cataphract

@cataphract cataphract commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Error seen in the wild (telemetry).

Reviewer checklist

  • Test coverage seems ok.
  • Appropriate labels assigned.

@cataphract
cataphract requested review from a team as code owners September 18, 2026 12:48
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-18T12:50:25.476764Z 2842fc5 PR opened
🔒 Security Review Completed 2026-09-18T12:51:46.401907Z 2842fc5 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@datadog-prod-us1-6

datadog-prod-us1-6 Bot commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pipelines  Tests

Unblock PR with BitsAI

❌ Errors

Your PR has failed checks. Please review the issues below and take necessary action before merging.

🚦 21 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | check libxml2 version — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | test_extension_ci: [7.1, valgrind] — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | Extension Tea Tests: [7.0, debug-zts] — 🔄 Retry may pass, looks flaky

View more details · View in GitLab

View all 21 failed jobs.

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 100.00%
Overall Coverage: 67.47% (-0.02%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 2842fc5 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks [ appsec ]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-18 13:18:15

Comparing candidate commit 2842fc5 in PR branch glopes/empty-data-appsec with baseline commit 8097433 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 12 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 ----------------------------------'

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant