-
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
[ASCII-2613] Remove golang.org/x/text/cases from some builds #32216
Conversation
Go Package Import DifferencesBaseline: fde3c5b
|
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
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=51419473 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit 9bb335d |
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
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.
It will be great to remove some dependencies! There's a couple of edge cases I think we need to handle..
parts := strings.Split(s, "_") | ||
var camelCase string | ||
for _, p := range parts { | ||
camelCase += caser.String(p) | ||
camelCase += strings.ToUpper(string(p[0])) | ||
camelCase += string(p[1:]) |
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.
This will panic if you:
- call on a string with two underscores.
toCamelCase("thing__thang")
- call on a string with a trailing underscore,
toCamelCase("thing_thang_")
- call on a string that starts with an underscore,
toCamelCase("_thing_thang")
Can we handle these case?
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.
The strings are hard coded above in the file, and they all have the expected format, do you still think I should handle those cases ?
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.
OK to be fair it’s just about correctly handling the empty string so it’s trivial enough
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 just handled empty strings, the current code should be equivalent to the previous one, let me know
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.
Ah, I didn't fully check the context, but at minimum a comment warning about the edge cases to prevent it being reused somewhere else would be useful.
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.
Perfect!
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: fde3c5b Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.48 | [-0.25, +1.20] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.40 | [+0.36, +0.44] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.34 | [-0.33, +1.00] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.24 | [-0.23, +0.70] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.61, +0.66] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.80, +0.85] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.10, +0.10] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.80, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.82, +0.79] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.85, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.84, +0.71] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.84, +0.70] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -0.15 | [-3.10, +2.81] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.23 | [-0.34, -0.11] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.35 | [-0.40, -0.29] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.50 | [-0.62, -0.38] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 8/10 | |
✅ | 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 | 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 | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
✅ | 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_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Remove
golang.org/x/text/cases
from some builds.Motivation
The dependencies are not needed just to capitalize the first letter of a string.
I'm hoping this reduces binary size a bit.
EDIT: -0.3MB, not a lot but considering the change is pretty small we might as well merge it.
Describe how you validated your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes