Skip to content

[FeatureFlags] Replay the configuration handler on registration and bump the OpenFeature package - #9264

Merged
pavlokhrebto merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
pavlo.khrebto/FFL-2468/ffe-config-replay-and-package-bump
Sep 18, 2026
Merged

pavlokhrebto merged 2 commits into
masterfrom
pavlo.khrebto/FFL-2468/ffe-config-replay-and-package-bump

Conversation

@pavlokhrebto

@pavlokhrebto pavlokhrebto commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary of changes

  • FeatureFlagsModule.RegisterOnNewConfigEventHandler now invokes the handler immediately when a configuration is already held.
  • Datadog.FeatureFlags.OpenFeature package version 2.3.0 → 2.3.1.

Reason for change

The Remote Configuration subscription is live from module construction, which is tracer startup. Application code builds the provider and registers the configuration handler much later. The handler only fired on a change, so a configuration that arrived in that window never reached it, and an application that waits on the handler as its readiness signal waits forever.

Datadog.FeatureFlags.OpenFeature 2.3.0 is already published on nuget.org and is immutable. The InitializeAsync fix in #9044 rewrites a method that lives in that package, so it cannot reach any customer until the package version moves.

Implementation details

Registration reads _evaluator. A non-null value means a configuration was applied, so the handler is invoked once at registration. The invoke is wrapped in a try/catch that logs a warning, matching ApplyConfiguration: the handler is application code and must not fail the caller.

2.3.1 follows the scheme documented in the csproj: the first two digits mirror the referenced OpenFeature version, the third digit is our own patch counter. The OpenFeature PackageReference stays at 2.3.0.

Test coverage

Three facts in FeatureFlagsModuleTests: the handler runs when it registers after a configuration was applied, it does not run when no configuration has arrived, and a throwing handler does not propagate out of registration.

Other details

Both changes address FFL-2468. The remaining half of that ticket, the InitializeAsync wait, is already on master via #9044. Together with this PR the next release carries the complete fix.

… OpenFeature package

The Remote Configuration subscription is live from module construction, so a
payload can land before application code builds a provider and registers a
handler. The handler only fired on a change, so a caller waiting on it waited
forever. Invoke it at registration when configuration is already held.

Bump Datadog.FeatureFlags.OpenFeature to 2.3.1 so the initialization fix can
ship: 2.3.0 is already published and immutable.
@pavlokhrebto pavlokhrebto changed the title [FeatureFlags] Replay the config handler on registration and bump the… [FeatureFlags] Replay the configuration handler on registration and bump the OpenFeature package Sep 17, 2026
@pavlokhrebto pavlokhrebto added type:enhancement Improvement to an existing feature AI Generated Largely based on code generated by an AI or LLM. This label is the same across all dd-trace-* repos feature_flags labels Sep 17, 2026
@dd-trace-dotnet-ci-bot

dd-trace-dotnet-ci-bot Bot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing This PR (9264) and master.

✅ No regressions detected

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

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-17 12:27:21

Comparing candidate commit c4fe818 in PR branch pavlo.khrebto/FFL-2468/ffe-config-replay-and-package-bump with baseline commit 6e2344e in branch master.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 71 metrics, 1 unstable metrics, 64 known flaky benchmarks, 62 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 ----------------------------------'

Unstable benchmarks

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

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark.SendAsync netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable execution_time [-29.349ms; -8.528ms] or [-14.657%; -4.259%]

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 [-8788.074op/s; -8129.990op/s] or [-10.420%; -9.640%]

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

  • 🟥 throughput [-9123.419op/s; -7796.113op/s] or [-9.277%; -7.927%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.605KB; +1.605KB] or [+48.760%; +48.776%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+308.019ms; +311.874ms] or [+152.850%; +154.763%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-57.672op/s; -52.727op/s] or [-10.376%; -9.487%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.012KB; +1.012KB] or [+37.524%; +37.537%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+376.887ms; +380.684ms] or [+297.764%; +300.763%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+69.309op/s; +72.799op/s] or [+9.138%; +9.598%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.090KB; +1.090KB] or [+40.417%; +40.429%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+396.192ms; +400.653ms] or [+350.615%; +354.562%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+4.734KB; +4.734KB] or [+99.652%; +99.667%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-60262.886op/s; -59899.123op/s] or [-46.888%; -46.605%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.856KB; +3.856KB] or [+81.546%; +81.558%]
  • 🟩 execution_time [-15.942ms; -11.756ms] or [-7.445%; -5.490%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-61715.867op/s; -58953.549op/s] or [-45.049%; -43.033%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+4.583KB; +4.584KB] or [+99.120%; +99.133%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-49318.275op/s; -47052.836op/s] or [-44.589%; -42.541%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.356KB; +1.356KB] or [+109.716%; +109.731%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-288384.199op/s; -285070.661op/s] or [-29.445%; -29.107%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+519 bytes; +520 bytes] or [+42.477%; +42.486%]
  • 🟩 execution_time [-25.810ms; -20.921ms] or [-11.510%; -9.330%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-92009.832op/s; -69328.531op/s] or [-9.830%; -7.406%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+1.320KB; +1.320KB] or [+109.261%; +109.277%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-177234.552op/s; -160639.567op/s] or [-25.465%; -23.081%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.378KB; +3.378KB] or [+89.003%; +89.017%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-73240.744op/s; -72474.818op/s] or [-49.290%; -48.775%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.336KB; +3.336KB] or [+88.150%; +88.161%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-75175.500op/s; -72262.396op/s] or [-47.833%; -45.979%]

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

  • 🟥 allocated_mem [+3.264KB; +3.264KB] or [+88.493%; +88.506%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-56227.224op/s; -53603.279op/s] or [-44.792%; -42.702%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-19.450ms; -15.071ms] or [-8.966%; -6.947%]

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

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.759KB; -13.756KB] or [-42.324%; -42.316%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.830ms; +300.624ms] or [+149.815%; +150.211%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1054.909op/s; +1072.285op/s] or [+11.651%; +11.843%]

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

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.722KB; -13.718KB] or [-42.341%; -42.329%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.242ms; +303.463ms] or [+151.413%; +153.037%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+2218.367op/s; +2432.891op/s] or [+16.967%; +18.608%]

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

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-13.722KB; -13.718KB] or [-42.341%; -42.329%]
  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.845ms; +303.668ms] or [+151.542%; +152.964%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1681.482op/s; +1822.091op/s] or [+16.234%; +17.591%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+296.341ms; +297.420ms] or [+145.551%; +146.081%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+596.810op/s; +605.853op/s] or [+15.822%; +16.061%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.460ms; +303.036ms] or [+147.373%; +148.143%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+2786.637op/s; +2831.581op/s] or [+40.485%; +41.138%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.842ms; +303.068ms] or [+150.860%; +151.473%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1411.831op/s; +1425.987op/s] or [+28.024%; +28.305%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-146.012µs; -141.916µs] or [-29.978%; -29.137%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+848.374op/s; +875.871op/s] or [+41.320%; +42.659%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-133.182µs; -106.420µs] or [-30.545%; -24.408%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+801.396op/s; +925.663op/s] or [+34.842%; +40.244%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-142.120µs; -120.128µs] or [-30.450%; -25.738%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+772.380op/s; +855.124op/s] or [+35.655%; +39.474%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-124.985µs; -119.471µs] or [-33.745%; -32.256%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1297.354op/s; +1369.699op/s] or [+48.048%; +50.727%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-95.782µs; -71.049µs] or [-30.578%; -22.682%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1039.223op/s; +1274.381op/s] or [+32.396%; +39.726%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-137.806µs; -115.426µs] or [-37.698%; -31.576%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1331.123op/s; +1467.739op/s] or [+47.769%; +52.671%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark.SendRequest net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.830ms; +300.590ms] or [+149.646%; +150.025%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [+313.599ms; +385.694ms] or [+340.738%; +419.072%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+688.220op/s; +859.695op/s] or [+5.655%; +7.064%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [+316.283ms; +351.710ms] or [+240.151%; +267.050%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472

  • unstable execution_time [+270.064ms; +343.373ms] or [+124.173%; +157.879%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-574.655op/s; -519.212op/s] or [-52.069%; -47.046%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [+203.117ms; +336.390ms] or [+86.560%; +143.355%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-671.841op/s; -588.376op/s] or [-44.812%; -39.245%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+324.474ms; +335.799ms] or [+194.073%; +200.847%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-412.190op/s; -373.749op/s] or [-28.700%; -26.024%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OptimizedCharSliceWithPool netcoreapp3.1

  • unstable execution_time [-170.411µs; +54.404µs] or [-9.130%; +2.915%]
  • unstable throughput [+3.124op/s; +135.082op/s] or [+0.583%; +25.214%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-159.767µs; -113.439µs] or [-8.093%; -5.746%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+32.633op/s; +44.594op/s] or [+6.442%; +8.803%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearch net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+303.732ms; +305.303ms] or [+152.954%; +153.745%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.434ms; +303.891ms] or [+151.550%; +152.280%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.817ms; +305.702ms] or [+151.620%; +153.572%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark.CallElasticsearchAsync net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.170ms; +303.667ms] or [+151.740%; +152.491%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+296.400ms; +299.538ms] or [+146.557%; +148.108%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.088ms; +305.224ms] or [+152.605%; +154.701%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+24494.399op/s; +33664.056op/s] or [+5.289%; +7.269%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.349ms; +304.978ms] or [+151.752%; +153.072%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.512ms; +304.716ms] or [+150.276%; +151.873%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+25989.507op/s; +33970.666op/s] or [+5.161%; +6.745%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.171ms; +305.650ms] or [+150.327%; +152.058%]

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

  • 🟩 execution_time [-16.224ms; -12.538ms] or [-7.544%; -5.830%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [+8.817µs; +54.422µs] or [+2.178%; +13.443%]

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

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-20.197KB; -20.175KB] or [-7.368%; -7.359%]
  • unstable execution_time [-31.617µs; +26.075µs] or [-6.249%; +5.154%]

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

  • 🟩 allocated_mem [-15.851KB; -15.833KB] or [-5.778%; -5.772%]
  • unstable execution_time [-42.544µs; +19.035µs] or [-7.373%; +3.299%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [+5.989µs; +10.454µs] or [+14.156%; +24.709%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-4726.385op/s; -2892.025op/s] or [-19.897%; -12.175%]

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

  • unstable execution_time [-15.357µs; -7.713µs] or [-23.826%; -11.966%]
  • unstable throughput [+2027.944op/s; +3684.040op/s] or [+12.442%; +22.603%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+302.777ms; +304.023ms] or [+153.040%; +153.670%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.227ms; +305.376ms] or [+153.323%; +155.435%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.034ms; +303.085ms] or [+150.204%; +151.732%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark.SendReceive net472

  • 🟥 throughput [-27728.599op/s; -25916.207op/s] or [-7.676%; -7.174%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.073ms; +301.556ms] or [+149.061%; +150.299%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.994ms; +303.092ms] or [+150.642%; +152.198%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+301.305ms; +303.894ms] or [+152.802%; +154.115%]

scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.SingleSpanAspNetCoreBenchmark.SingleSpanAspNetCore net472

  • 🟥 execution_time [+300.405ms; +301.434ms] or [+149.843%; +150.357%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+60963519.989op/s; +61318902.994op/s] or [+44.397%; +44.656%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+421.408ms; +425.039ms] or [+524.096%; +528.612%]

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

  • 🟥 execution_time [+299.464ms; +300.670ms] or [+149.366%; +149.967%]

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

  • 🟩 throughput [+43962.778op/s; +63290.280op/s] or [+5.089%; +7.326%]

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

  • 🟩 throughput [+71702.258op/s; +79137.852op/s] or [+7.121%; +7.860%]

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

  • 🟩 throughput [+43255.240op/s; +51399.635op/s] or [+7.854%; +9.333%]

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

  • 🟩 throughput [+69278.256op/s; +88982.219op/s] or [+7.740%; +9.942%]

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.Asm.AppSecBodyBenchmark.ObjectExtractorSimpleBody net6.0
  • 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.OriginalCharSlice net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.CharSliceBenchmark.OriginalCharSlice netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog net472
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark.EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1
  • scenario:Benchmarks.Trace.Iast.StringAspectsBenchmark.StringConcatBenchmark 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.StartFinishScope net6.0
  • 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

@pavlokhrebto
pavlokhrebto marked this pull request as ready for review September 17, 2026 10:21
@pavlokhrebto
pavlokhrebto requested review from a team as code owners September 17, 2026 10:21
@pavlokhrebto
pavlokhrebto requested review from leoromanovsky and vjfridge and removed request for a team September 17, 2026 10:21

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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: f1e41ab118

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 tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/FeatureFlags/FeatureFlagsModule.cs Outdated
Comment thread tracer/src/Datadog.Trace/FeatureFlags/FeatureFlagsModule.cs Outdated

@leoromanovsky leoromanovsky left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the thorough testing here. Is there a risk of them being flakey?

@pavlokhrebto
pavlokhrebto merged commit a3b0659 into master Sep 18, 2026
145 checks passed
@pavlokhrebto
pavlokhrebto deleted the pavlo.khrebto/FFL-2468/ffe-config-replay-and-package-bump branch September 18, 2026 08:47
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the vNext-v3 milestone Sep 18, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

AI Generated Largely based on code generated by an AI or LLM. This label is the same across all dd-trace-* repos feature_flags type:enhancement Improvement to an existing feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants