chore(ci): Switch to Confluent docker images since wurstmeister ones disappeared

[jszwedko]

No description provided.

[jszwedko]

Tests aren't actually providing a valid client certificate so I removed the truststore bits and set KAFKA_SSL_CLIENT_AUTH=none.

[jszwedko]

I removed these seemingly unneeded options.

[jszwedko]

Confluent images require a file to supply the password.

[jszwedko]

It was complaining this was missing now.

[jszwedko]

/ci-run-integration-kafka

[jszwedko]

The image update seems to have resulted in the first consumer no longer receiving events before the shutdown so I commented out the per-consumer assertions for now.

cc/ @jches I'm sorry to bother, but since you added this test, I expect you might more easily be able to figure out what's happening here.

[jches]

Interesting..I wouldn't expect a different image to matter much; I think I used the bitnami kafka images when I was doing this testing locally. IIRC this test sets up two consumers consecutively, so the first one runs, shuts down, and then the second runs, to test the "drain acknowledgements before shutdown" part.

If the first consumer isn't getting any messages, you could allow it to run for a little bit longer - the default is 2s and can be adjusted in the test code a few lines above this, or by environment variables.

Another thing worth looking into is consumer group wait times - I don't recall the exact setting but there is a configurable waiting period where the brokers will wait for more consumers to join before the consumers can do their initial partition assignment. If that's set longer than the shutdown delay here it might explain this behavior.

[jches]

Ah it's group.initial.rebalance.delay.ms and looks like the default is 3s https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-134%3A+Delay+initial+consumer+group+rebalance . Not sure if the old images had a different setting that made this work..
I'd try setting that lower (1s would probably be fine in this case) in the broker config, or set the shutdown delay to 4 or 5s

[jszwedko]

That did it! Thank you!!

[datadog-vectordotdev]

Datadog Report

Branch report: jszwedko/update-kafka-docker-image
Commit report: 8459b87
Test service: vector

✅ 0 Failed, 8 Passed, 0 Skipped, 25.41s Total Time

[github-actions]

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 1e026c5d-a29a-47be-9b64-2ea97e71eb81
Baseline: f74d488
Comparison: cb457b8
Total CPUs: 7

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI
➖	syslog_humio_logs	ingress throughput	+2.54	[+2.35, +2.73]
➖	fluent_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+1.93	[+1.45, +2.42]
➖	http_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+1.09	[+1.01, +1.16]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs	ingress throughput	+0.54	[+0.44, +0.65]
➖	otlp_grpc_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.53	[+0.44, +0.62]
➖	syslog_log2metric_splunk_hec_metrics	ingress throughput	+0.51	[+0.36, +0.65]
➖	syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics	ingress throughput	+0.50	[+0.34, +0.66]
➖	syslog_splunk_hec_logs	ingress throughput	+0.42	[+0.35, +0.48]
➖	syslog_regex_logs2metric_ddmetrics	ingress throughput	+0.41	[+0.27, +0.55]
➖	http_to_http_acks	ingress throughput	+0.32	[-1.03, +1.68]
➖	splunk_hec_route_s3	ingress throughput	+0.24	[-0.22, +0.69]
➖	syslog_loki	ingress throughput	+0.18	[+0.10, +0.27]
➖	http_to_http_noack	ingress throughput	+0.15	[+0.05, +0.25]
➖	otlp_http_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.08	[-0.03, +0.19]
➖	http_to_http_json	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.06, +0.09]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_acks	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.14, +0.14]
➖	splunk_hec_indexer_ack_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.01	[-0.15, +0.14]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_noack	ingress throughput	-0.05	[-0.16, +0.07]
➖	enterprise_http_to_http	ingress throughput	-0.09	[-0.15, -0.03]
➖	http_to_s3	ingress throughput	-0.16	[-0.44, +0.12]
➖	http_text_to_http_json	ingress throughput	-0.25	[-0.37, -0.13]
➖	socket_to_socket_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.26	[-0.34, -0.19]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole_acks	ingress throughput	-0.63	[-0.72, -0.55]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole	ingress throughput	-1.09	[-1.26, -0.92]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs_acks	ingress throughput	-1.51	[-1.61, -1.41]
➖	file_to_blackhole	egress throughput	-1.79	[-4.30, +0.71]
➖	syslog_log2metric_tag_cardinality_limit_blackhole	ingress throughput	-1.86	[-1.99, -1.73]

Explanation

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".

[github-actions]

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: ceb74c24-fdc5-4547-a695-5c2db39b0bf6
Baseline: e1d1e85
Comparison: 9e14433
Total CPUs: 7

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI
➖	splunk_hec_route_s3	ingress throughput	+1.77	[+1.30, +2.23]
➖	syslog_loki	ingress throughput	+1.75	[+1.67, +1.82]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole_acks	ingress throughput	+1.73	[+1.62, +1.84]
➖	syslog_log2metric_splunk_hec_metrics	ingress throughput	+1.68	[+1.52, +1.84]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole	ingress throughput	+1.11	[+0.98, +1.23]
➖	syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics	ingress throughput	+1.10	[+0.96, +1.25]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs_acks	ingress throughput	+1.05	[+0.96, +1.15]
➖	syslog_humio_logs	ingress throughput	+0.95	[+0.85, +1.04]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs	ingress throughput	+0.93	[+0.80, +1.05]
➖	http_to_http_acks	ingress throughput	+0.77	[-0.60, +2.14]
➖	http_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+0.57	[+0.49, +0.65]
➖	fluent_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+0.57	[+0.07, +1.06]
➖	otlp_grpc_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.56	[+0.47, +0.65]
➖	socket_to_socket_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.52	[+0.43, +0.60]
➖	http_to_s3	ingress throughput	+0.15	[-0.13, +0.43]
➖	http_to_http_noack	ingress throughput	+0.14	[+0.04, +0.25]
➖	http_to_http_json	ingress throughput	+0.03	[-0.05, +0.10]
➖	splunk_hec_indexer_ack_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.14, +0.15]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_acks	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.14, +0.14]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_noack	ingress throughput	-0.04	[-0.16, +0.07]
➖	enterprise_http_to_http	ingress throughput	-0.08	[-0.17, +0.00]
➖	file_to_blackhole	egress throughput	-0.22	[-2.56, +2.12]
➖	http_text_to_http_json	ingress throughput	-0.59	[-0.71, -0.48]
➖	syslog_log2metric_tag_cardinality_limit_blackhole	ingress throughput	-1.06	[-1.19, -0.94]
➖	otlp_http_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-1.55	[-1.69, -1.40]
➖	syslog_regex_logs2metric_ddmetrics	ingress throughput	-1.98	[-2.14, -1.82]
➖	syslog_splunk_hec_logs	ingress throughput	-4.11	[-4.21, -4.00]

Explanation

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".

[github-actions]

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 906aff07-c8a9-41aa-a189-1a0d5b116954
Baseline: e1d1e85
Comparison: 3a115c5
Total CPUs: 7

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI
➖	syslog_splunk_hec_logs	ingress throughput	+1.94	[+1.84, +2.04]
➖	file_to_blackhole	egress throughput	+1.27	[-1.28, +3.82]
➖	fluent_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+1.20	[+0.71, +1.68]
➖	http_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+1.19	[+1.08, +1.29]
➖	syslog_humio_logs	ingress throughput	+1.04	[+0.87, +1.20]
➖	syslog_loki	ingress throughput	+0.80	[+0.71, +0.89]
➖	syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics	ingress throughput	+0.79	[+0.65, +0.93]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs	ingress throughput	+0.58	[+0.47, +0.70]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole_acks	ingress throughput	+0.24	[+0.11, +0.37]
➖	otlp_http_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.06	[-0.07, +0.20]
➖	http_to_http_noack	ingress throughput	+0.06	[-0.03, +0.14]
➖	http_to_http_json	ingress throughput	+0.05	[-0.03, +0.13]
➖	syslog_regex_logs2metric_ddmetrics	ingress throughput	+0.01	[-0.19, +0.22]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_acks	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.14, +0.14]
➖	splunk_hec_indexer_ack_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.15, +0.15]
➖	enterprise_http_to_http	ingress throughput	-0.05	[-0.14, +0.04]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_noack	ingress throughput	-0.06	[-0.17, +0.06]
➖	syslog_log2metric_tag_cardinality_limit_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.25	[-0.41, -0.10]
➖	http_to_s3	ingress throughput	-0.30	[-0.58, -0.02]
➖	otlp_grpc_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.40	[-0.49, -0.31]
➖	syslog_log2metric_splunk_hec_metrics	ingress throughput	-0.40	[-0.56, -0.25]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs_acks	ingress throughput	-0.53	[-0.62, -0.45]
➖	http_text_to_http_json	ingress throughput	-0.61	[-0.75, -0.46]
➖	socket_to_socket_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.75	[-0.84, -0.67]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.82	[-0.92, -0.71]
➖	http_to_http_acks	ingress throughput	-1.41	[-2.77, -0.06]
➖	splunk_hec_route_s3	ingress throughput	-1.56	[-2.04, -1.07]

Explanation

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".