Skip to content

Surface autodiscovery template resolution failures via Agent Health#49452

Open
mwdd146980 wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
mwdd146980/surface-ad-template-resolution-failures-v2
Open

Surface autodiscovery template resolution failures via Agent Health#49452
mwdd146980 wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
mwdd146980/surface-ad-template-resolution-failures-v2

Conversation

@mwdd146980
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mwdd146980 mwdd146980 commented Apr 16, 2026

Motivation

When an autodiscovered check template contains a variable not supported by the listener (e.g. %%extra_dbinstanceidentifier%% on a Docker listener), the config is silently dropped with only a DEBUG log. Users and support have no way to discover why their check instance disappeared. See write-up.

Approach

Builds on @Mathew-Estafanous's AD annotation health check (#48962), reusing the admisconfig issue module and constants:

  • Log upgrade: log.Debuglog.Errorf in resolveTemplateForService() so failures are visible at the default log level
  • Health event: Reports template resolution failures as ad-misconfiguration issues with a new template_resolution error source and tailored remediation steps (check template variables, review listener docs, run configcheck)
  • Auto-clearing: Health issue is cleared on successful resolution AND when the service/template is removed (deletion path in reconcileService)
  • Dependency threading: Unwraps the option.Option[healthplatform.Component] already on AutoConfig (from [CONTP-1365] feat(health): Add AD annotation health check #48962) and passes the concrete component into the config manager
  • CheckID disambiguation: Includes the template digest in the health issue checkID to prevent collisions when multiple templates with the same check name target the same service

Verification

  • Unit tests: 48 tests pass (2 new configmgr integration tests, 1 new admisconfig test)
  • Linting: 0 issues
  • Manual test (dda env dev Linux container): Confirmed ERROR log, health issue detection, agent diagnose --verbose output with remediation steps, and auto-clearing on container removal

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Documentation: https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AGTH/pages/6562972254/Autodiscovery+Template+Resolution+Failure

@mwdd146980 mwdd146980 requested review from a team as code owners April 16, 2026 13:31
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts bot added internal Identify a non-fork PR team/container-platform The Container Platform Team labels Apr 16, 2026
@github-actions github-actions bot added the medium review PR review might take time label Apr 16, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 97230cac4f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread comp/core/autodiscovery/autodiscoveryimpl/configmgr.go Outdated
Comment thread comp/core/autodiscovery/autodiscoveryimpl/configmgr.go
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@louis-cqrl louis-cqrl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

small comment but LGTM fir the rest

Comment thread comp/core/autodiscovery/autodiscoveryimpl/autoconfig.go
Comment thread comp/core/autodiscovery/autodiscoveryimpl/configmgr.go
When an autodiscovered check template contains a variable not supported by the
listener (e.g. %%extra_dbinstanceidentifier%% on a Docker listener), the config
was silently dropped with only a DEBUG log.

This change:
- Upgrades the log from DEBUG to ERROR so the failure is visible at default level
- Reports the failure as an AD misconfiguration health event (reusing the
  admisconfig module from PR #48962) with template-resolution-specific
  remediation steps
- Automatically clears the health issue when resolution succeeds

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@mwdd146980 mwdd146980 self-assigned this Apr 16, 2026
@mwdd146980 mwdd146980 force-pushed the mwdd146980/surface-ad-template-resolution-failures-v2 branch from 97230ca to 6bc4ac7 Compare April 16, 2026 13:51
@mwdd146980 mwdd146980 added the qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests label Apr 16, 2026
@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts bot commented Apr 16, 2026

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor d11522b4:

Results for datadog-agent_7.79.0~devel.git.807.3fdf09c.pipeline.108032283-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

- Include template digest in health issue checkID to prevent collisions when
  multiple templates with the same check name target the same service. (Codex)
- Clear stale health issues in the reconcileService deletion path when a
  service or template is removed. (Codex)
- Note: making healthplatform a required (non-optional) dependency (louis-cqrl
  feedback) requires adding hostnameinterface.Component to several commands
  and is deferred to a follow-up PR.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da
Copy link
Copy Markdown

cit-pr-commenter-54b7da bot commented Apr 16, 2026

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 4eb054ee-5abf-4f6d-99c1-f2421d7b3ce4

Baseline: d11522b
Comparison: 3fdf09c
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization +0.25 [-2.81, +3.30] 1 Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +1.60 [-0.02, +3.22] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +1.39 [+1.16, +1.62] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative memory utilization +0.95 [+0.80, +1.10] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter memory utilization +0.29 [+0.07, +0.51] 1 Logs
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization +0.25 [-2.81, +3.30] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization +0.23 [+0.08, +0.38] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_delta memory utilization +0.16 [-0.02, +0.34] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.09 [-0.43, +0.60] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.41, +0.46] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization +0.02 [-0.03, +0.08] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.01 [-0.20, +0.21] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.21, +0.21] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.11, +0.11] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.01 [-0.40, +0.38] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput -0.03 [-0.15, +0.10] 1 Logs
docker_containers_memory memory utilization -0.05 [-0.13, +0.04] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics memory utilization -0.05 [-0.23, +0.13] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.11 [-0.14, -0.08] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.21 [-0.27, -0.16] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.25 [-0.42, -0.08] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization -0.34 [-0.41, -0.28] 1 Logs
ddot_logs memory utilization -0.51 [-0.57, -0.44] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization -0.67 [-0.78, -0.57] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 10/10 573 ≥ 26
docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10 274.93MiB ≤ 370MiB
docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 10/10 655 ≥ 26
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.24GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.22GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 0/10 4 > 3 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 175.47MiB ≤ 181MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 1/10 4 > 3 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 500.85MiB ≤ 550MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 208.12MiB ≤ 220MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 349.27 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 407.98MiB ≤ 475MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard

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:

  1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

  2. 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.

  3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.

  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 0/10 replicas passed. Failed 10 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 1/10 replicas passed. Failed 9 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

internal Identify a non-fork PR medium review PR review might take time qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/agent-health team/container-platform The Container Platform Team

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants