Skip to content

fix: stack and handling_stack were not aligned with ET#4529

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
hannahkm/etp-stack
Mar 12, 2026
Merged

fix: stack and handling_stack were not aligned with ET#4529
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
hannahkm/etp-stack

Conversation

@hannahkm

@hannahkm hannahkm commented Mar 12, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Aligns the values of error.stack and error.handling_stack with what ET expects.

Motivation

Fix Error Tracking.

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!

@hannahkm
hannahkm requested a review from a team as a code owner March 12, 2026 15:44
kakkoyun
kakkoyun reviewed Mar 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread ddtrace/tracer/span.go Outdated
@hannahkm
fix stack vs handling
85ca9a2 
fix test

neat fix

oops
@hannahkm
hannahkm force-pushed the hannahkm/etp-stack branch from 0ee4de4 to 85ca9a2 Compare March 12, 2026 15:54
@datadog-datadog-prod-us1

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Mar 12, 2026 •
edited by datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 59.20%

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 85ca9a2 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Was this helpful? React with 👍/👎 or give us feedback!

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Mar 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-03-12 16:13:16

Comparing candidate commit 85ca9a2 in PR branch hannahkm/etp-stack with baseline commit cb2ef86 in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 155 metrics, 9 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 ----------------------------------'

@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 6082a00 into main Mar 12, 2026
207 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the hannahkm/etp-stack branch March 12, 2026 16:49
hannahkm added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2026
@hannahkm
fix: stack and handling_stack were not aligned with ET (#4529)
d20bc0f 
<!--
* New contributors are highly encouraged to read our
  [CONTRIBUTING](/CONTRIBUTING.md) documentation.
* Commit and PR titles should be prefixed with the general area of the pull request's change.

-->
### What does this PR do?

Aligns the values of `error.stack` and `error.handling_stack` with what ET expects.

<!--
* A brief description of the change being made with this pull request.
* If the description here cannot be expressed in a succinct form, consider
  opening multiple pull requests instead of a single one.
-->

### Motivation

Fix Error Tracking.

<!--
* What inspired you to submit this pull request?
* Link any related GitHub issues or PRs here.
* If this resolves a GitHub issue, include "Fixes #XXXX" to link the issue and auto-close it on merge.
-->

### Reviewer's Checklist
<!--
* Authors can use this list as a reference to ensure that there are no problems
  during the review but the signing off is to be done by the reviewer(s).
-->

- [ ] Changed code has unit tests for its functionality at or near 100% coverage.
- [ ] [System-Tests](https://github.com/DataDog/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!


Co-authored-by: hannahs.kim <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@kakkoyun kakkoyun kakkoyun approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

mergequeue-status: done

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@hannahkm @kakkoyun