[FeatureFlags] Remove the manual (non-OpenFeature) Feature Flags API

[pavlokhrebto]

Summary of changes

Removes Datadog.Trace.FeatureFlags.FeatureFlagsSdk, the manual non-OpenFeature Feature Flags
API, from Datadog.Trace.Manual, along with its three CallTargets and its test sample.
OpenFeature (Datadog.FeatureFlags.OpenFeature) becomes the only way to evaluate flags in .NET.

Reason for change

.NET was the only tracer with a second, Datadog-specific evaluation surface — Java, Go and Node
ship OpenFeature only. If OpenFeature is the intended supported approach, the duplicate is better
removed now, while Feature Flags is experimental and gated behind
DD_EXPERIMENTAL_FLAGGING_PROVIDER_ENABLED, than after customers adopt it.

The surface shipped in v3.36.0 (#7896). It is undocumented and excluded from the public API
snapshot: PublicApiTestsBase skips types carrying both [Browsable(false)] and
[EditorBrowsable(Never)], so FeatureFlagsSdk appears nowhere in
PublicApiTests.Datadog.Trace.Manual.PublicApiHasNotChanged.verified.txt.

It also makes sense to remove it now while no customers use it.

Implementation details

Deleted:

• Datadog.Trace.Manual/FeatureFlags/ — FeatureFlagsSdk, EvaluationContext, IEvaluation.Manual
• ManualInstrumentation/FeatureFlags/ — the Evaluate, IsAvailable and
  RegisterOnNewConfigEventHandler CallTargets
• the three <Compile Include> links in Datadog.Trace.Manual.csproj (EvaluationReason,
  ValueType, IEvaluation). Datadog.FeatureFlags.OpenFeature.csproj links its own copies
  straight from Datadog.Trace and is unaffected
• the Samples.FeatureFlags project, with its Datadog.Trace.sln and CODEOWNERS entries

Program.cs was shared by both samples through a <Compile Include> link, so it moves into
Samples.OpenFeature and the link is dropped.

Generated files regenerated with CompileManagedSrc and RegenerateSolutions. The diffs are pure
deletions of the three rows, with no signature renumbering.

Test coverage

FeatureFlagsTests, OpenFeatureFeatureFlagsTests and FeatureFlagsTestsBase collapse into a
single FeatureFlagsTests on the OpenFeature sample. Coverage of the manual surface goes away
with the surface itself.

Two sample-side improvements come with the move:

• Samples.OpenFeature's Evaluator.Init() awaits SetProviderAsync instead of calling .Wait()
• a new <INITIALIZED: READY> probe and assertion — the only coverage of the OpenFeature
  InitializeAsync CallTarget merged in feat(feature-flags): wire source-agnostic activation and OpenFeature InitializeAsync #9044

Other details

Breaking change for anyone calling Datadog.Trace.FeatureFlags.FeatureFlagsSdk directly.

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-16 14:31:49

Comparing candidate commit f31de54 in PR branch pavlo.khrebto/EX-2703/remove-ffe-manual-api with baseline commit 67afbad in branch master.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 1 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 71 metrics, 0 unstable metrics, 63 known flaky benchmarks, 63 flaky benchmarks without significant changes.

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 ----------------------------------'

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark.SendAsync net472

• 🟥 throughput [-5486.532op/s; -5143.293op/s] or [-6.263%; -5.871%]

Known flaky benchmarks

These benchmarks are marked as flaky and will not trigger a failure. Modify FLAKY_BENCHMARKS_REGEX to control which benchmarks are marked as flaky.

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net472

• 🟥 throughput [-9475.714op/s; -8581.063op/s] or [-11.235%; -10.175%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 throughput [-9852.031op/s; -8605.217op/s] or [-10.017%; -8.750%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.605KB; +1.605KB] or [+48.760%; +48.776%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+307.520ms; +310.322ms] or [+152.602%; +153.993%]
• 🟥 throughput [-56.364op/s; -52.107op/s] or [-10.141%; -9.375%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.011KB; +1.011KB] or [+37.485%; +37.498%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+372.822ms; +373.943ms] or [+294.552%; +295.438%]
• 🟩 throughput [+72.664op/s; +74.595op/s] or [+9.580%; +9.835%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.088KB; +1.088KB] or [+40.343%; +40.355%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+394.735ms; +398.765ms] or [+349.325%; +352.892%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody net472

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+4.734KB; +4.734KB] or [+99.652%; +99.667%]
• 🟥 throughput [-60038.611op/s; -59673.393op/s] or [-46.713%; -46.429%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody net6.0

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.856KB; +3.856KB] or [+81.546%; +81.558%]
• 🟩 execution_time [-16.611ms; -12.440ms] or [-7.758%; -5.810%]
• 🟥 throughput [-61060.223op/s; -58276.465op/s] or [-44.571%; -42.539%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleMoreComplexBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+4.583KB; +4.584KB] or [+99.120%; +99.133%]
• 🟥 throughput [-49028.859op/s; -46773.670op/s] or [-44.328%; -42.289%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody net472

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.356KB; +1.356KB] or [+109.716%; +109.731%]
• 🟥 throughput [-317661.769op/s; -311772.232op/s] or [-32.435%; -31.833%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody net6.0

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+519 bytes; +520 bytes] or [+42.477%; +42.486%]
• 🟩 execution_time [-27.033ms; -18.429ms] or [-12.055%; -8.218%]
• 🟥 throughput [-105255.417op/s; -73433.983op/s] or [-11.245%; -7.845%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.AllCycleSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.320KB; +1.320KB] or [+109.261%; +109.277%]
• 🟥 throughput [-175139.261op/s; -157596.104op/s] or [-25.164%; -22.644%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody net472

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.378KB; +3.378KB] or [+89.003%; +89.017%]
• 🟥 throughput [-72680.936op/s; -71924.737op/s] or [-48.913%; -48.405%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody net6.0

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.336KB; +3.336KB] or [+88.150%; +88.161%]
• 🟥 throughput [-74898.465op/s; -72019.543op/s] or [-47.657%; -45.825%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorMoreComplexBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.264KB; +3.264KB] or [+88.493%; +88.506%]
• 🟥 throughput [-55662.660op/s; -53007.730op/s] or [-44.343%; -42.228%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody net6.0

• 🟩 throughput [+319913.739op/s; +347896.364op/s] or [+10.667%; +11.600%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-19.331ms; -14.998ms] or [-8.911%; -6.913%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs net472

• 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.759KB; -13.756KB] or [-42.324%; -42.316%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+299.715ms; +300.701ms] or [+149.757%; +150.250%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1003.851op/s; +1034.556op/s] or [+11.087%; +11.427%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs net6.0

• 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.722KB; -13.718KB] or [-42.341%; -42.329%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+300.112ms; +303.251ms] or [+151.347%; +152.930%]
• 🟩 throughput [+2308.445op/s; +2520.096op/s] or [+17.656%; +19.275%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeArgs netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.722KB; -13.718KB] or [-42.341%; -42.329%]
• 🟥 execution_time [+300.556ms; +303.543ms] or [+151.397%; +152.901%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1735.492op/s; +1867.573op/s] or [+16.755%; +18.030%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+296.503ms; +297.796ms] or [+145.630%; +146.265%]
• 🟩 throughput [+593.673op/s; +604.249op/s] or [+15.738%; +16.019%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+297.433ms; +300.565ms] or [+145.404%; +146.935%]
• 🟩 throughput [+2688.721op/s; +2749.426op/s] or [+39.062%; +39.944%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecEncoderBenchmark.EncodeLegacyArgs netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+300.457ms; +301.481ms] or [+150.168%; +150.680%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1324.699op/s; +1398.401op/s] or [+26.294%; +27.757%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark net472

• 🟩 execution_time [-147.109µs; -142.995µs] or [-30.203%; -29.359%]
• 🟩 throughput [+857.449op/s; +885.383op/s] or [+41.762%; +43.122%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark net6.0

• 🟩 execution_time [-113.990µs; -86.541µs] or [-26.144%; -19.848%]
• 🟩 throughput [+615.332op/s; +749.418op/s] or [+26.752%; +32.582%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmark netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-142.011µs; -119.993µs] or [-30.426%; -25.709%]
• 🟩 throughput [+771.139op/s; +854.386op/s] or [+35.597%; +39.440%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack net472

• 🟩 execution_time [-126.537µs; -122.031µs] or [-34.164%; -32.948%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1337.920op/s; +1392.634op/s] or [+49.550%; +51.577%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack net6.0

• 🟩 execution_time [-94.226µs; -70.425µs] or [-30.081%; -22.483%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1021.872op/s; +1230.362op/s] or [+31.855%; +38.354%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecWafBenchmark.RunWafRealisticBenchmarkWithAttack netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 execution_time [-138.137µs; -115.675µs] or [-37.789%; -31.644%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1335.338op/s; +1475.243op/s] or [+47.920%; +52.941%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+298.982ms; +299.745ms] or [+149.223%; +149.603%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest net6.0

• unstable execution_time [+320.948ms; +389.341ms] or [+348.723%; +423.035%]
• 🟩 throughput [+843.603op/s; +1027.005op/s] or [+6.932%; +8.439%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest netcoreapp3.1

• unstable execution_time [+294.567ms; +347.671ms] or [+223.662%; +263.983%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

• unstable execution_time [+315.748ms; +362.208ms] or [+145.178%; +166.540%]
• 🟥 throughput [-517.211op/s; -472.831op/s] or [-46.864%; -42.843%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0

• unstable execution_time [+135.023ms; +282.558ms] or [+57.541%; +120.414%]
• 🟥 throughput [-673.614op/s; -590.050op/s] or [-44.930%; -39.357%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+333.236ms; +344.935ms] or [+199.314%; +206.311%]
• 🟥 throughput [-392.297op/s; -353.778op/s] or [-27.315%; -24.633%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice net6.0

• 🟩 execution_time [-140.771µs; -100.118µs] or [-7.131%; -5.072%]
• 🟩 throughput [+28.174op/s; +39.186op/s] or [+5.562%; +7.736%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+303.123ms; +305.426ms] or [+152.647%; +153.807%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+303.067ms; +305.296ms] or [+151.868%; +152.985%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+299.687ms; +302.675ms] or [+150.550%; +152.051%]
• 🟩 throughput [+38492.637op/s; +45701.451op/s] or [+8.109%; +9.627%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+301.270ms; +303.038ms] or [+151.288%; +152.175%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+300.130ms; +303.157ms] or [+148.401%; +149.898%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+301.353ms; +305.198ms] or [+152.739%; +154.688%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+298.045ms; +300.242ms] or [+149.592%; +150.694%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+300.626ms; +302.676ms] or [+149.835%; +150.856%]
• 🟩 throughput [+42910.682op/s; +50006.719op/s] or [+8.521%; +9.930%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+300.637ms; +303.794ms] or [+149.564%; +151.135%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark net472

• unstable execution_time [+13.441µs; +58.086µs] or [+3.320%; +14.348%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark net6.0

• 🟩 allocated_mem [-20.012KB; -19.989KB] or [-7.300%; -7.292%]
• unstable execution_time [-26.799µs; +32.282µs] or [-5.297%; +6.380%]
• unstable throughput [-112.831op/s; +91.282op/s] or [-5.630%; +4.555%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatAspectBenchmark netcoreapp3.1

• unstable execution_time [-55.110µs; +8.505µs] or [-9.550%; +1.474%]
• unstable throughput [-9.778op/s; +172.195op/s] or [-0.559%; +9.838%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark net6.0

• unstable execution_time [+7.691µs; +12.120µs] or [+18.179%; +28.648%]
• 🟥 throughput [-5370.834op/s; -3564.824op/s] or [-22.610%; -15.007%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark netcoreapp3.1

• unstable execution_time [-14.424µs; -7.062µs] or [-22.378%; -10.957%]
• 🟩 throughput [+1719.293op/s; +3319.769op/s] or [+10.548%; +20.368%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+302.747ms; +304.531ms] or [+153.025%; +153.927%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+299.694ms; +303.279ms] or [+152.543%; +154.368%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+300.517ms; +302.711ms] or [+150.446%; +151.544%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+296.034ms; +298.564ms] or [+147.546%; +148.807%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0

• 🟥 execution_time [+302.398ms; +304.747ms] or [+151.850%; +153.029%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+301.518ms; +303.807ms] or [+152.910%; +154.071%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net472

• 🟥 execution_time [+298.824ms; +300.035ms] or [+149.055%; +149.659%]
• 🟩 throughput [+61146596.978op/s; +61525874.899op/s] or [+44.531%; +44.807%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net6.0

• unstable execution_time [+328.145ms; +394.297ms] or [+408.106%; +490.379%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore netcoreapp3.1

• 🟥 execution_time [+298.541ms; +299.791ms] or [+148.905%; +149.529%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope net6.0

• 🟩 throughput [+75113.522op/s; +89174.437op/s] or [+7.013%; +8.326%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 throughput [+47786.632op/s; +66886.138op/s] or [+5.531%; +7.742%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan netcoreapp3.1

• 🟩 throughput [+75768.284op/s; +83843.669op/s] or [+7.525%; +8.327%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes net6.0

• 🟩 throughput [+44685.231op/s; +51403.303op/s] or [+8.114%; +9.334%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin net6.0

• 🟩 throughput [+71160.315op/s; +88543.035op/s] or [+7.950%; +9.892%]

Known flaky benchmarks without significant changes:

• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_AddEvent_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_GetContext_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_RecordException_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetAttributes_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_SetStatus_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.OpenTelemetry.InstrumentedApi.Trace.TelemetrySpanBenchmark.StartSpan_UpdateName_Sampled netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark.StartStopWithChild net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSlice netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishScope net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan net6.0
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishTwoScopes netcoreapp3.1
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin net472
• scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark.RunOnMethodBegin netcoreapp3.1

[bouwkast]

I understand the goal of consolidating on OpenFeature.
Could you help me understand the trade-off between removing this API and retaining it as a compatibility layer?

Although hidden and experimental, it has shipped since 3.36.0. Existing users would need code changes to upgrade the NuGet package. Removing the corresponding CallTargets could also change behavior for applications that keep their existing package and upgrade only the installed tracer which is a common upgrade path.

Since both entry points already share the backend, would retaining the existing adapter be feasible while directing new usage to OpenFeature? Long-term compatibility also came up in the original review, so I’d like to understand whether there are maintenance constraints or assumptions about existing usage that I’m missing

[pavlokhrebto]

I understand the goal of consolidating on OpenFeature. Could you help me understand the trade-off between removing this API and retaining it as a compatibility layer?

Although hidden and experimental, it has shipped since 3.36.0. Existing users would need code changes to upgrade the NuGet package. Removing the corresponding CallTargets could also change behavior for applications that keep their existing package and upgrade only the installed tracer which is a common upgrade path.

Since both entry points already share the backend, would retaining the existing adapter be feasible while directing new usage to OpenFeature? Long-term compatibility also came up in the original review, so I’d like to understand whether there are maintenance constraints or assumptions about existing usage that I’m missing

@bouwkast thanks for your concern.
We are quite confident that there are no customers using this, as the whole FeatureFlagsSdk  type has [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] and [Browsable(false)] and we never asked no one to use this

[andrewlock]

As discussed, we normally would not want to make these changes in minor releases. However, given the API was experimental, hidden from the public API, and you're sure noone's using it, I'm ok with us removing it (better now than later). If that proves to be too disruptive, we can consider reverting it.

[dd-trace-dotnet-ci-bot]

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing This PR (9260) and master.

✅ No regressions detected

📄 View the full report (charts + all metrics) →

[bouwkast]

Thanks for the clarification

Could we update that clarification in the PR description, that we are confident that nobody is using this and that it was never advertised that way it will show up in git history as the explicit reason?

[leoromanovsky]

Good idea on this. I don't have exact usage information, but all the customers who have wrote into support have been using openfeature so I feel reasonable that this API is not used.