Skip to content

feat(internal/civisibility): implement pagination for known tests#4509

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
daniel.mohedano/known-tests-pagination
Mar 9, 2026
Merged

feat(internal/civisibility): implement pagination for known tests#4509
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
daniel.mohedano/known-tests-pagination

Conversation

@daniel-mohedano

@daniel-mohedano daniel-mohedano commented Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Implements pagination support for the known tests API.

  • The library includes the empty pagination info by default in the first request, so the backend always responds with the biggest page size it supports. This avoids updates on the library whenever the maximum page size is updated.
  • The request logic now merges the responses and loops until there are no more pages to be requested.

Motivation

To reduce load and avoid timeouts and issues on the backend, the endpoint as been updated to make use of pagination.

Reviewer's Checklist

  • Changed code has unit tests for its functionality at or near 100% coverage.
  • System-Tests covering this feature have been added and enabled with the va.b.c-dev version tag.
  • There is a benchmark for any new code, or changes to existing code.
  • If this interacts with the agent in a new way, a system test has been added.
  • New code is free of linting errors. You can check this by running make lint locally.
  • New code doesn't break existing tests. You can check this by running make test locally.
  • Add an appropriate team label so this PR gets put in the right place for the release notes.
  • All generated files are up to date. You can check this by running make generate locally.
  • Non-trivial go.mod changes, e.g. adding new modules, are reviewed by @DataDog/dd-trace-go-guild. Make sure all nested modules are up to date by running make fix-modules locally.

Unsure? Have a question? Request a review!

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Mar 9, 2026 •
edited by datadog-official Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 80.00%
• Overall Coverage: 59.20% (-0.05%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: d1c5e8e | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Was this helpful? React with 👍/👎 or give us feedback!

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 9, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 59.97%. Comparing base (89047df) to head (d1c5e8e).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
internal/civisibility/utils/net/known_tests_api.go 80.00% 3 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
internal/civisibility/utils/net/known_tests_api.go 82.14% <80.00%> (-4.23%) ⬇️

... and 261 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-03-09 11:30:03

Comparing candidate commit d1c5e8e in PR branch daniel.mohedano/known-tests-pagination with baseline commit 89047df in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 156 metrics, 8 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 ----------------------------------'

@daniel-mohedano
daniel-mohedano marked this pull request as ready for review March 9, 2026 14:32
@daniel-mohedano
daniel-mohedano requested a review from a team as a code owner March 9, 2026 14:32
tonyredondo
tonyredondo approved these changes Mar 9, 2026
View reviewed changes

@tonyredondo tonyredondo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@daniel-mohedano

daniel-mohedano commented Mar 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Mar 9, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-03-09 16:55:25 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

2026-03-09 16:55:30 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 29m (p90).

2026-03-09 17:08:43 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 1595de3 into main Mar 9, 2026
270 of 273 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the daniel.mohedano/known-tests-pagination branch March 9, 2026 17:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@tonyredondo tonyredondo tonyredondo approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

mergequeue-status: done team:test-optimization

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@daniel-mohedano @tonyredondo