Skip to content

fix(gorm): respect DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED#4618

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
rarguelloF/fix-gorm-service-name
Apr 8, 2026
Merged

fix(gorm): respect DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED#4618
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
rarguelloF/fix-gorm-service-name

Conversation

@rarguelloF

@rarguelloF rarguelloF commented Mar 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

(continuation of #4579)

The gorm.io/gorm.v1 contrib package hardcodes "gorm.db" as the service
name, ignoring DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED. This
causes gorm.db to appear as a separate service in Datadog APM even when
the env var is set to true.

Fix by:

  1. Adding a naming schema to PackageGormIOGormV1 in packages.go
    (matching the pattern used by PackageJackcPGXV5)
  2. Using instr.ServiceName() instead of the hardcoded string in
    option.go (matching contrib/jackc/pgx.v5/option.go)

Fixes #4578

Motivation

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!

guipace and others added 3 commits March 20, 2026 17:26
@guipace
fix(gorm): respect DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED
8e74c39 
The gorm.io/gorm.v1 contrib package hardcodes "gorm.db" as the service
name, ignoring DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED. This
causes gorm.db to appear as a separate service in Datadog APM even when
the env var is set to true.

Fix by:
1. Adding a naming schema to PackageGormIOGormV1 in packages.go
   (matching the pattern used by PackageJackcPGXV5)
2. Using instr.ServiceName() instead of the hardcoded string in
   option.go (matching contrib/jackc/pgx.v5/option.go)

Fixes #4578
@guipace
Merge branch 'main' into fix/gorm-respect-remove-integration-service-…
f5f1383 
…names
@rarguelloF
add test
e9a8f91
@rarguelloF
rarguelloF requested review from a team as code owners March 30, 2026 15:23
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the apm:ecosystem contrib/* related feature requests or bugs label Mar 30, 2026
@datadog-official

datadog-official Bot commented Mar 30, 2026 •
edited by datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 60.05%

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 8b76013 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Was this helpful? React with 👍/👎 or give us feedback!

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Mar 30, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.66%. Comparing base (0e06d9c) to head (8b76013).

Additional details and impacted files
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
instrumentation/packages.go 7.81% <ø> (ø)

... and 439 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 30, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-04-08 17:52:33

Comparing candidate commit 8b76013 in PR branch rarguelloF/fix-gorm-service-name with baseline commit 0e06d9c in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 216 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 ----------------------------------'

@rarguelloF rarguelloF mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2026
Closed
genesor
genesor approved these changes Mar 31, 2026
View reviewed changes

@genesor genesor 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

hannahkm
hannahkm approved these changes Apr 1, 2026
View reviewed changes

@hannahkm hannahkm left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@rarguelloF

rarguelloF commented Apr 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Apr 6, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-04-06 08:36:48 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

2026-04-06 08:36:54 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 27m (p90).

2026-04-06 08:47:30 UTC ❌ MergeQueue: The checks failed on this merge request

Tests failed on this commit 4986972:

What to do next?

  • Investigate the failures and when ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!
  • If your PR checks are green, try to rebase/merge. It might be because the CI run is a bit old.
  • Any question, go check the FAQ.

@rarguelloF

rarguelloF commented Apr 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Apr 7, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-04-07 09:18:14 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

2026-04-07 09:18:19 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 27m (p90).

2026-04-07 09:27:59 UTC ❌ MergeQueue: The checks failed on this merge request

Tests failed on this commit 556d613:

What to do next?

  • Investigate the failures and when ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!
  • If your PR checks are green, try to rebase/merge. It might be because the CI run is a bit old.
  • Any question, go check the FAQ.

@rarguelloF

rarguelloF commented Apr 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Apr 8, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-04-08 08:59:16 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

2026-04-08 08:59:22 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This pull request is not mergeable according to GitHub. Common reasons include pending required checks, missing approvals, or merge conflicts — but it could also be blocked by other repository rules or settings.
It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals. View in MergeQueue UI.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.

2026-04-08 09:39:10 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 27m (p90).

2026-04-08 09:50:00 UTC ❌ MergeQueue: The checks failed on this merge request

Tests failed on this commit 291847a:

What to do next?

  • Investigate the failures and when ready, re-add your pull request to the queue!
  • If your PR checks are green, try to rebase/merge. It might be because the CI run is a bit old.
  • Any question, go check the FAQ.

@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 38ce0ca into main Apr 8, 2026
231 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the rarguelloF/fix-gorm-service-name branch April 8, 2026 18:28
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
@genesor genesor genesor approved these changes
@hannahkm hannahkm hannahkm approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

apm:ecosystem contrib/* related feature requests or bugs mergequeue-status: done

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

gorm.io/gorm.v1 contrib does not respect DD_TRACE_REMOVE_INTEGRATION_SERVICE_NAMES_ENABLED

5 participants

@rarguelloF @kakkoyun @genesor @hannahkm @guipace