Minor dev docs cleanup

[ofek]

Motivation

• The outdated document was already removed in 7c66a01 but was erroneously brought back by a bot in 6705c4e.
• Reflect the recent change of command name for consistency.

[cit-pr-commenter]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 92f0877c-d173-4378-85af-7dd0fc5b6353

Baseline: 3efc88d
Comparison: cf9edff
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	-0.48	[-3.62, +2.66]	1	Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	+2.41	[-0.34, +5.16]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+1.12	[+1.06, +1.18]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	+0.32	[+0.29, +0.36]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	ddot_metrics	memory utilization	+0.12	[+0.01, +0.23]	1	Logs
➖	otlp_ingest_logs	memory utilization	+0.11	[-0.01, +0.24]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders	memory utilization	+0.11	[+0.06, +0.15]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.04	[-0.52, +0.60]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.04	[-0.55, +0.62]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.00	[-0.64, +0.65]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.03, +0.03]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.01	[-0.65, +0.63]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	-0.01	[-0.34, +0.32]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	-0.03	[-0.06, +0.01]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_logs	memory utilization	-0.03	[-0.12, +0.07]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	-0.07	[-0.10, -0.03]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	otlp_ingest_metrics	memory utilization	-0.35	[-0.50, -0.20]	1	Logs
➖	docker_containers_cpu	% cpu utilization	-0.48	[-3.62, +2.66]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory utilization	-0.53	[-0.92, -0.13]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	docker_containers_memory	memory utilization	-0.58	[-0.66, -0.50]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed	links
❌	docker_containers_cpu	simple_check_run	9/10
✅	docker_containers_memory	memory_usage	10/10
✅	docker_containers_memory	simple_check_run	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	quality_gate_idle	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	lost_bytes	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	cpu_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	lost_bytes	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory_usage	10/10	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

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

• quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_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 intake_connections: 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 lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 3efc88d

Successful checks

Info

	Quality gate	Delta	On disk size (MiB)	Delta	On wire size (MiB)
✅	agent_deb_amd64	$${0}$$	$${701.31}$$ < $${704.84}$$	$${+0.02}$$	$${177.6}$$ < $${178.58}$$
✅	agent_deb_amd64_fips	$${0}$$	$${688.59}$$ < $${703.09}$$	$${-0}$$	$${174.5}$$ < $${178.12}$$
✅	agent_heroku_amd64	$${0}$$	$${350.87}$$ < $${355.37}$$	$${+0}$$	$${94.58}$$ < $${95.72}$$
✅	agent_msi	$${0}$$	$${974.42}$$ < $${980.61}$$	$${-0.01}$$	$${147.35}$$ < $${149.31}$$
✅	agent_rpm_amd64	$${0}$$	$${701.3}$$ < $${704.83}$$	$${+0.04}$$	$${179.88}$$ < $${180.22}$$
✅	agent_rpm_amd64_fips	$${0}$$	$${688.58}$$ < $${703.08}$$	$${+0.03}$$	$${176.03}$$ < $${179.85}$$
✅	agent_rpm_arm64	$${0}$$	$${690.25}$$ < $${694.74}$$	$${-0}$$	$${162.1}$$ < $${163.96}$$
✅	agent_rpm_arm64_fips	$${0}$$	$${678.36}$$ < $${693.05}$$	$${+0.01}$$	$${158.77}$$ < $${163.0}$$
✅	agent_suse_amd64	$${0}$$	$${701.3}$$ < $${704.83}$$	$${+0.04}$$	$${179.88}$$ < $${180.22}$$
✅	agent_suse_amd64_fips	$${0}$$	$${688.58}$$ < $${703.08}$$	$${+0.03}$$	$${176.03}$$ < $${179.85}$$
✅	agent_suse_arm64	$${0}$$	$${690.25}$$ < $${694.74}$$	$${-0}$$	$${162.1}$$ < $${163.96}$$
✅	agent_suse_arm64_fips	$${0}$$	$${678.36}$$ < $${693.05}$$	$${+0.01}$$	$${158.77}$$ < $${163.0}$$
✅	docker_agent_amd64	$${+0}$$	$${783.29}$$ < $${788.65}$$	$${-0}$$	$${269.99}$$ < $${272.01}$$
✅	docker_agent_arm64	$${+0}$$	$${795.57}$$ < $${802.0}$$	$${+0}$$	$${256.74}$$ < $${259.7}$$
✅	docker_agent_jmx_amd64	$${+0}$$	$${974.59}$$ < $${979.84}$$	$${+0}$$	$${339.02}$$ < $${340.95}$$
✅	docker_agent_jmx_arm64	$${+0}$$	$${975.47}$$ < $${981.8}$$	$${-0}$$	$${321.77}$$ < $${324.65}$$
✅	docker_cluster_agent_amd64	$${+0}$$	$${211.87}$$ < $${214.5}$$	$${+0}$$	$${72.04}$$ < $${73.51}$$
✅	docker_cluster_agent_arm64	$${+0}$$	$${227.86}$$ < $${230.33}$$	$${-0}$$	$${68.33}$$ < $${69.77}$$
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64	$${0}$$	$${7.07}$$ < $${7.12}$$	$${+0}$$	$${2.95}$$ < $${3.29}$$
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64	$${0}$$	$${6.69}$$ < $${6.92}$$	$${-0}$$	$${2.7}$$ < $${3.07}$$
✅	docker_dogstatsd_amd64	$${+0}$$	$${38.58}$$ < $${39.57}$$	$${+0}$$	$${14.91}$$ < $${15.76}$$
✅	docker_dogstatsd_arm64	$${-0}$$	$${37.23}$$ < $${38.2}$$	$${-0}$$	$${14.35}$$ < $${14.83}$$
✅	dogstatsd_deb_amd64	$${0}$$	$${29.81}$$ < $${31.4}$$	$${+0}$$	$${7.86}$$ < $${8.95}$$
✅	dogstatsd_deb_arm64	$${0}$$	$${28.4}$$ < $${29.97}$$	$${+0}$$	$${6.82}$$ < $${7.89}$$
✅	dogstatsd_rpm_amd64	$${0}$$	$${29.81}$$ < $${31.4}$$	$${-0}$$	$${7.87}$$ < $${8.96}$$
✅	dogstatsd_suse_amd64	$${0}$$	$${29.81}$$ < $${31.4}$$	$${-0}$$	$${7.87}$$ < $${8.96}$$
✅	iot_agent_deb_amd64	$${0}$$	$${54.17}$$ < $${54.55}$$	$${+0}$$	$${13.65}$$ < $${14.45}$$
✅	iot_agent_deb_arm64	$${0}$$	$${51.49}$$ < $${51.9}$$	$${-0}$$	$${11.82}$$ < $${12.63}$$
✅	iot_agent_deb_armhf	$${0}$$	$${51.04}$$ < $${51.42}$$	$${+0}$$	$${11.91}$$ < $${12.74}$$
✅	iot_agent_rpm_amd64	$${0}$$	$${54.17}$$ < $${54.55}$$	$${+0}$$	$${13.67}$$ < $${14.47}$$
✅	iot_agent_suse_amd64	$${0}$$	$${54.17}$$ < $${54.55}$$	$${+0}$$	$${13.67}$$ < $${14.47}$$

[Ishirui]

Huh, really weird that the bot brought it back... Should we take this as an indication that something is broken with the workflow creating these PRs ? In this case it was only docs, so no real impact, but it would be much more dangerous for this to happen with actual source code.

[FlorentClarret]

Huh, really weird that the bot brought it back... Should we take this as an indication that something is broken with the workflow creating these PRs ? In this case it was only docs, so no real impact, but it would be much more dangerous for this to happen with actual source code.

For posterity, from my slack message:

It think they got a conflict because of the change in the first commit and they mistakenly brought it back during the resolution

Also we still have references to this file here and there https://github.com/search?q=repo%3ADataDog%2Fdatadog-agent%20agent_dev_env.md&type=code

[Ishirui]

Huh, really weird that the bot brought it back... Should we take this as an indication that something is broken with the workflow creating these PRs ? In this case it was only docs, so no real impact, but it would be much more dangerous for this to happen with actual source code.

For posterity, from my slack message:

It think they got a conflict because of the change in the first commit and they mistakenly brought it back during the resolution

Also we still have references to this file here and there https://github.com/search?q=repo%3ADataDog%2Fdatadog-agent%20agent_dev_env.md&type=code

Tysm for checking Florent, since this was only re-deleting an already-deleted file I thought all references would already have been cleaned up. I'll retract my approval for now, I'd rather we ensure those refs are deleted first 👍

[Ishirui]

References to deleted agent_dev_env.md file still exist in the repo, thanks @FlorentClarret for checking !

[Ishirui]

I think @Enzu83 is on PTO though, someone else from @DataDog/agent-runtimes will need to review

[ofek]

/merge

[dd-devflow-routing-codex]

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2025-08-20 13:54:41 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

---

2025-08-20 13:54:59 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This merge request is not mergeable yet, because of pending checks/missing approvals. It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals.
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.

---

2025-08-20 14:08:22 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 39m (p90).

---

2025-08-20 14:25:11 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: The merge request ahead of this one was cancelled, retrying soon

---

2025-08-20 14:41:29 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged