Skip to content

perf(internal/civisibility): cache CODEOWNERS discovery misses#4699

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/civisibility-codeowners-discovery-cache
Apr 28, 2026
Merged

perf(internal/civisibility): cache CODEOWNERS discovery misses#4699
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/civisibility-codeowners-discovery-cache

Conversation

@tonyredondo

@tonyredondo tonyredondo commented Apr 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What does this PR do?

Caches CI Visibility CODEOWNERS discovery misses. Successful CODEOWNERS loads were already cached, but when no CODEOWNERS file existed, each call to GetCodeOwners() repeated the same filesystem checks. This PR records that the initial lookup completed with no file and returns nil directly on later calls.

The change keeps CODEOWNERS parsing and matching behavior unchanged. Existing-but-invalid CODEOWNERS files are not cached as misses, so they remain retryable if fixed during tests.

Motivation

Reduce repeated CI Visibility startup/test-source overhead in repositories without CODEOWNERS while preserving the existing process-local configuration model.

Reviewers 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 does not 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.

Validation performed:

  • go test ./internal/civisibility/utils/...
  • go test ./internal/civisibility/integrations/...
  • go test ./internal/civisibility/utils -run 'TestGetCodeOwners' -count=10
  • git diff --check

@tonyredondo
tonyredondo marked this pull request as ready for review April 27, 2026 16:43
@tonyredondo
tonyredondo requested a review from a team as a code owner April 27, 2026 16:43
@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Apr 27, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-04-28 10:12:35

Comparing candidate commit 3c237c5 in PR branch feat/civisibility-codeowners-discovery-cache with baseline commit 5de8153 in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 210 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 ----------------------------------'

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Apr 27, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 80.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 61.94%. Comparing base (5de8153) to head (3c237c5).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
internal/civisibility/utils/codeowners.go 80.00% 2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
internal/civisibility/utils/codeowners.go 90.39% <80.00%> (+13.09%) ⬆️

... and 276 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.

@datadog-prod-us1-6

datadog-prod-us1-6 Bot commented Apr 28, 2026 •
edited by datadog-prod-us1-5 Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tests

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 78.57%
• Overall Coverage: 61.20% (+0.01%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 3c237c5 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 1f7ab1c into main Apr 28, 2026
192 of 193 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the feat/civisibility-codeowners-discovery-cache branch April 28, 2026 10:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@gnufede gnufede gnufede 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

@tonyredondo @gnufede