Skip to content

refactor(lambda): simplify timeout completion monitoring - #10885

Draft
BridgeAR wants to merge 2 commits into
joey/fix-lambda-timeout-monitorfrom
BridgeAR/2026-10-22-lambda-timeout-simplifications
Draft

BridgeAR wants to merge 2 commits into
joey/fix-lambda-timeout-monitorfrom
BridgeAR/2026-10-22-lambda-timeout-simplifications

Conversation

@BridgeAR

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Stacked on #10775.

The Datadog adapter already selects invocation completion. Observe that result without wrapping context methods that the adapter immediately replaces. Native handlers retain callback drain, idle completion, and handler metadata.

Drop callback-shape classification and timer fallbacks that no supported Lambda runtime needs.

The Datadog adapter already selects invocation completion. Repeating that
selection wraps context methods that the adapter immediately replaces and
retains a callback classifier without a supported caller. Observe normalized
completion directly and preserve native lifecycle handling for raw handlers.
@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Oct 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Overall package size

Self size: 9.69 MB
Deduped: 10.44 MB
No deduping: 10.44 MB

Dependency sizes | name | version | self size | total size | |------|---------|-----------|------------| | import-in-the-middle | 3.5.1 | 127.66 kB | 528.28 kB | | opentracing | 0.14.7 | 194.81 kB | 194.81 kB | | dc-polyfill | 0.1.11 | 25.74 kB | 25.74 kB |

🤖 This report was automatically generated by heaviest-objects-in-the-universe

@datadog-datadog-prod-us1

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Oct 22, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pipelines  Tests

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🔄 Datadog retried 3 tests - 3 passed on retry View in Datadog

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 83.05% (-15.27%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 3bcd6a9 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Oct 22, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 83.10%. Comparing base (cc88a08) to head (3bcd6a9).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (cc88a08) and HEAD (3bcd6a9). Click for more details.

HEAD has 14 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (cc88a08) HEAD (3bcd6a9)
master-coverage 12 0
apm-integrations 1 0
test-optimization 1 0
Additional details and impacted files
@@                         Coverage Diff                          @@
##           joey/fix-lambda-timeout-monitor   #10885       +/-   ##
====================================================================
- Coverage                            98.91%   83.10%   -15.82%     
====================================================================
  Files                                 1069     1058       -11     
  Lines                               175360   170357     -5003     
  Branches                                74       74               
====================================================================
- Hits                                173459   141570    -31889     
- Misses                                1900    28786    +26886     
  Partials                                 1        1               
Flag Coverage Δ
ai-guard 63.66% <ø> (ø)
apm-capabilities 54.78% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
apm-integrations ?
appsec 57.20% <ø> (-0.02%) ⬇️
debugger 70.89% <ø> (ø)
instrumentation 55.28% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
llmobs 81.41% <ø> (ø)
master-coverage ?
openfeature 67.37% <ø> (ø)
platform 68.42% <ø> (ø)
profiling 65.90% <ø> (ø)
serverless 65.02% <100.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
test-optimization ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

shimmer.wrap returns the patched target after a successful wrap. Its only
undefined return requires a null target, which getOwnPropertyDescriptor
rejects before the call, so the nullish fallback cannot run.
@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Oct 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-22 14:55:32

Comparing candidate commit 3bcd6a9 in PR branch BridgeAR/2026-10-22-lambda-timeout-simplifications with baseline commit cc88a08 in branch joey/fix-lambda-timeout-monitor.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 2448 metrics, 9 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 ----------------------------------'

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:appsec-appsec-enabled-20

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-59312.435KB; +60817.935KB] or [-25.067%; +25.704%]

scenario:appsec-iast-no-vulnerability-iast-enabled-default-config-20

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-23.724MB; +7.509MB] or [-10.151%; +3.213%]

scenario:appsec-iast-with-vulnerability-iast-enabled-default-config-24

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-15.129MB; +21.432MB] or [-4.253%; +6.025%]

scenario:openfeature-initialization-configuration-20

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-3595.384KB; +4922.293KB] or [-4.851%; +6.642%]

scenario:openfeature-scale-full-24

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-23.232MB; +29.211MB] or [-7.518%; +9.452%]

scenario:openfeature-scale-full-26

  • unstable max_rss_usage [-31007.100KB; +29527.900KB] or [-12.588%; +11.987%]

scenario:plugin-elasticsearch-search-20

  • unstable cpu_user_time [-144.056ms; +260.338ms] or [-3.941%; +7.122%]
  • unstable execution_time [-144.638ms; +260.903ms] or [-3.957%; +7.138%]
  • unstable throughput [-48663.677op/s; +27024.757op/s] or [-6.543%; +3.633%]

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant