Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(tracer): fix multiprocessing queue on aws lambda #7612

Merged

Conversation

christophe-papazian
Copy link
Contributor

@christophe-papazian christophe-papazian commented Nov 15, 2023

#6929 introduced a bug as multiprocessing.Queue is not supported on AWS lambda platform.
This fix prevents the use of the Queue on aws lambda, as this is used for a RC only feature, and lambda does not use RC.

Checklist

  • Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
  • Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included in the PR.
  • Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage, maintainability, etc).
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
  • Library release note guidelines are followed. If no release note is required, add label changelog/no-changelog.
  • Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, public corp docs).
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

  • Title is accurate.
  • No unnecessary changes are introduced.
  • Description motivates each change.
  • Avoids breaking API changes unless absolutely necessary.
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
  • Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
  • Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy
  • If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review from @DataDog/security-design-and-guidance.
  • This PR doesn't touch any of that.

@christophe-papazian christophe-papazian changed the title fix(tracer): replace multiprocessing Queue with Pipe fix(tracer): fix multiprocessing queue on aws lambda Nov 15, 2023
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Nov 15, 2023

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2023-11-20 18:09:03

Comparing candidate commit 8555f1e in PR branch christophe-papazian/fix-multiprocessing-queue-for-lambda with baseline commit 1c9765f in branch 2.x.

Found 4 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 14 metrics, 0 unstable metrics.

scenario:otelspan-start-finish-telemetry

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-834.599KB; -655.935KB] or [-2.750%; -2.161%]

scenario:tracer-large

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-1.242MB; -1.067MB] or [-4.140%; -3.555%]

scenario:tracer-medium

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-861.266KB; -672.686KB] or [-2.961%; -2.313%]

scenario:tracer-small

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-924.571KB; -738.405KB] or [-3.179%; -2.539%]

@christophe-papazian christophe-papazian marked this pull request as ready for review November 20, 2023 17:44
@christophe-papazian christophe-papazian requested a review from a team as a code owner November 20, 2023 17:44
@christophe-papazian christophe-papazian added the changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. label Nov 20, 2023
@astuyve
Copy link
Contributor

astuyve commented Nov 20, 2023

Approved for Serverless, this seems to fix #7251
image

@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 enabled auto-merge (squash) November 20, 2023 20:16
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 20, 2023 20:47
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 enabled auto-merge (squash) November 20, 2023 20:49
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 force-pushed the christophe-papazian/fix-multiprocessing-queue-for-lambda branch from 595a5e0 to 65c4ec9 Compare November 20, 2023 20:50
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 force-pushed the christophe-papazian/fix-multiprocessing-queue-for-lambda branch from 65c4ec9 to 4597b77 Compare November 20, 2023 20:50
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 merged commit 1656e7d into 2.x Nov 20, 2023
140 checks passed
@ZStriker19 ZStriker19 deleted the christophe-papazian/fix-multiprocessing-queue-for-lambda branch November 20, 2023 21:22
Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.0 failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 1

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add .worktrees/backport-2.0 2.0
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-2.0
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-7612-to-2.0
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 1656e7d4f523e500370f358b00002e579ee1a951
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-7612-to-2.0
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-2.0

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.0 and the compare/head branch is backport-7612-to-2.0.

Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.1 failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 1

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add .worktrees/backport-2.1 2.1
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-2.1
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-7612-to-2.1
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 1656e7d4f523e500370f358b00002e579ee1a951
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-7612-to-2.1
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-2.1

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.1 and the compare/head branch is backport-7612-to-2.1.

github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2023
#6929 introduced a bug as
multiprocessing.Queue is not supported on AWS lambda platform.
This fix prevents the use of the Queue on aws lambda, as this is used
for a RC only feature, and lambda does not use RC.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Zachary Groves <32471391+ZStriker19@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: ZStriker19 <zach.groves@datadoghq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 1656e7d)
@majorgreys majorgreys mentioned this pull request Nov 21, 2023
18 tasks
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2023
The release note in #7612 was not in the correct directory.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

(cherry picked from commit d5ae475)
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2023
The release note in #7612 was not in the correct directory.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

(cherry picked from commit d5ae475)
peterg17 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 28, 2023
The release note in #7612 was not in the correct directory.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.
majorgreys pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
…7692)

Backport 1656e7d from #7612 to 2.2.

#6929 introduced a bug as
multiprocessing.Queue is not supported on AWS lambda platform.
This fix prevents the use of the Queue on aws lambda, as this is used
for a RC only feature, and lambda does not use RC.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

Co-authored-by: Christophe Papazian <114495376+christophe-papazian@users.noreply.github.com>
majorgreys added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
Backport d5ae475 from #7706 to 2.2.

The release note in #7612 was not in the correct directory.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

Co-authored-by: Tahir H. Butt <tahir.butt@datadoghq.com>
jim pushed a commit to discord/dd-trace-py that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2024
Backport d5ae475 from DataDog#7706 to 2.3.

The release note in DataDog#7612 was not in the correct directory.

## Checklist

- [x] Change(s) are motivated and described in the PR description.
- [x] Testing strategy is described if automated tests are not included
in the PR.
- [x] Risk is outlined (performance impact, potential for breakage,
maintainability, etc).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] [Library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
are followed. If no release note is required, add label
`changelog/no-changelog`.
- [x] Documentation is included (in-code, generated user docs, [public
corp docs](https://github.com/DataDog/documentation/)).
- [x] Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist

- [x] Title is accurate.
- [x] No unnecessary changes are introduced.
- [x] Description motivates each change.
- [x] Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes unless absolutely necessary.
- [x] Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risk(s).
- [x] Change is maintainable (easy to change, telemetry, documentation).
- [x] Release note makes sense to a user of the library.
- [x] Reviewer has explicitly acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment.
- [x] Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)
- [x] If this PR touches code that signs or publishes builds or
packages, or handles credentials of any kind, I've requested a review
from `@DataDog/security-design-and-guidance`.
- [x] This PR doesn't touch any of that.

Co-authored-by: Tahir H. Butt <tahir.butt@datadoghq.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants