feat(data-pipeline)!: follow the full sql config in CSS obfuscation by Eldolfin · Pull Request #2535 · DataDog/libdatadog

Eldolfin · 2026-09-16T11:29:29Z

What does this PR do?

Pass the full obfuscation config exposed in the agent's /info to the sql obfuscator.

Now accept obfuscation_version 1 and 2 to enable obfuscation even when a custom config is set (see DataDog/datadog-agent#54573).

Motivation

More precise client-side stats for customers with a custom obfuscation config.

Additional Notes

See https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/APM/pages/6701580544/PENDING+Stats+obfuscation+precisions

How to test the change?

APMSP-3720

pr-commenter · 2026-09-16T11:37:48Z

Benchmarks

Comparison

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-06 13:36:42

Comparing candidate commit 120b839 in PR branch oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css with baseline commit 7717de8 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 24 metrics, 0 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 ----------------------------------'

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-06 13:36:29

Comparing candidate commit 120b839 in PR branch oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css with baseline commit 7717de8 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 31 metrics, 0 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 ----------------------------------'

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005

🟥 execution_time [+11.349µs; +11.768µs] or [+16.051%; +16.642%]
🟥 throughput [-2012253.162op/s; -1954408.169op/s] or [-14.229%; -13.820%]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-06 13:32:59

Comparing candidate commit 120b839 in PR branch oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css with baseline commit 7717de8 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 3 metrics, 0 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 ----------------------------------'

Candidate

Candidate benchmark details

Group 1

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
trace_buffer/1_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	56.234ms	56.382ms ± 0.101ms	56.371ms ± 0.048ms	56.416ms	56.532ms	56.791ms	57.022ms	1.15%	2.347	9.721	0.18%	0.007ms	1	200
trace_buffer/1_senders/10us_delay	throughput	15783.513op/s	15962.674op/s ± 28.498op/s	15965.655op/s ± 13.547op/s	15979.394op/s	15995.186op/s	16001.937op/s	16004.591op/s	0.24%	-2.314	9.480	0.18%	2.015op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/1_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	49.925ms	49.992ms ± 0.024ms	49.984ms ± 0.013ms	50.011ms	50.025ms	50.061ms	50.136ms	0.30%	1.473	5.929	0.05%	0.002ms	1	200
trace_buffer/1_senders/1us_delay	throughput	17951.212op/s	18002.915op/s ± 8.570op/s	18005.730op/s ± 4.730op/s	18008.884op/s	18012.386op/s	18015.157op/s	18026.995op/s	0.12%	-1.465	5.875	0.05%	0.606op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/1_senders/no_delay	execution_time	340.072µs	341.913µs ± 0.605µs	341.842µs ± 0.297µs	342.194µs	342.707µs	343.640µs	346.392µs	1.33%	2.146	14.733	0.18%	0.043µs	1	200
trace_buffer/1_senders/no_delay	throughput	2598209.148op/s	2632259.765op/s ± 4638.356op/s	2632798.277op/s ± 2284.250op/s	2634685.066op/s	2638398.342op/s	2642935.584op/s	2646496.929op/s	0.52%	-2.083	14.221	0.18%	327.981op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	56.337ms	56.931ms ± 0.349ms	56.883ms ± 0.254ms	57.191ms	57.567ms	57.796ms	58.000ms	1.96%	0.584	-0.199	0.61%	0.025ms	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/10us_delay	throughput	31034.382op/s	31618.381op/s ± 193.279op/s	31643.703op/s ± 141.257op/s	31777.614op/s	31877.048op/s	31918.639op/s	31950.748op/s	0.97%	-0.558	-0.248	0.61%	13.667op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	49.967ms	50.013ms ± 0.031ms	50.014ms ± 0.016ms	50.024ms	50.076ms	50.123ms	50.155ms	0.28%	1.377	3.319	0.06%	0.002ms	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/1us_delay	throughput	35888.753op/s	35990.787op/s ± 22.331op/s	35990.083op/s ± 11.240op/s	36008.288op/s	36019.717op/s	36022.007op/s	36023.436op/s	0.09%	-1.371	3.293	0.06%	1.579op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay	execution_time	857.834µs	892.203µs ± 14.957µs	892.613µs ± 10.318µs	903.131µs	916.268µs	924.697µs	928.561µs	4.03%	-0.014	-0.415	1.67%	1.058µs	1	200
trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay	throughput	1938484.005op/s	2018043.725op/s ± 33860.800op/s	2016552.087op/s ± 23290.350op/s	2039603.050op/s	2076634.018op/s	2092727.333op/s	2098309.206op/s	4.05%	0.093	-0.416	1.67%	2394.320op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	56.919ms	57.453ms ± 0.232ms	57.430ms ± 0.102ms	57.520ms	57.942ms	58.269ms	58.321ms	1.55%	1.027	2.117	0.40%	0.016ms	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/10us_delay	throughput	61727.844op/s	62660.758op/s ± 251.963op/s	62685.394op/s ± 111.119op/s	62798.619op/s	63002.730op/s	63192.830op/s	63247.526op/s	0.90%	-0.991	2.027	0.40%	17.816op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	49.988ms	50.035ms ± 0.037ms	50.029ms ± 0.016ms	50.042ms	50.104ms	50.147ms	50.250ms	0.44%	2.090	6.834	0.07%	0.003ms	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/1us_delay	throughput	71642.254op/s	71949.009op/s ± 52.697op/s	71957.552op/s ± 23.660op/s	71984.941op/s	72003.955op/s	72017.327op/s	72017.778op/s	0.08%	-2.081	6.766	0.07%	3.726op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/no_delay	execution_time	2.064ms	2.291ms ± 0.086ms	2.290ms ± 0.057ms	2.355ms	2.419ms	2.464ms	2.479ms	8.25%	-0.392	0.029	3.74%	0.006ms	1	200
trace_buffer/4_senders/no_delay	throughput	1452119.054op/s	1573490.152op/s ± 60101.148op/s	1571962.851op/s ± 39097.688op/s	1606759.869op/s	1689736.189op/s	1737983.570op/s	1744577.514op/s	10.98%	0.610	0.356	3.81%	4249.793op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	57.513ms	57.937ms ± 0.289ms	57.833ms ± 0.158ms	58.180ms	58.487ms	58.573ms	58.610ms	1.34%	0.713	-0.714	0.50%	0.020ms	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/10us_delay	throughput	122846.671op/s	124275.331op/s ± 617.591op/s	124496.999op/s ± 340.157op/s	124752.337op/s	125003.106op/s	125103.309op/s	125188.147op/s	0.56%	-0.702	-0.732	0.50%	43.670op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	50.010ms	50.099ms ± 0.102ms	50.084ms ± 0.035ms	50.127ms	50.189ms	50.250ms	51.327ms	2.48%	8.777	101.824	0.20%	0.007ms	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/1us_delay	throughput	140277.208op/s	143714.621op/s ± 288.443op/s	143758.265op/s ± 99.275op/s	143849.353op/s	143935.730op/s	143969.228op/s	143972.634op/s	0.15%	-8.614	99.170	0.20%	20.396op/s	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/no_delay	execution_time	4.137ms	5.885ms ± 0.419ms	6.102ms ± 0.110ms	6.183ms	6.226ms	6.263ms	6.322ms	3.61%	-1.602	2.528	7.10%	0.030ms	1	200
trace_buffer/8_senders/no_delay	throughput	1138862.387op/s	1230554.585op/s ± 100953.399op/s	1179949.223op/s ± 20807.230op/s	1264873.039op/s	1395445.807op/s	1592834.452op/s	1740333.675op/s	47.49%	2.183	6.043	8.18%	7138.483op/s	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
trace_buffer/1_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	[56.368ms; 56.396ms] or [-0.025%; +0.025%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/1_senders/10us_delay	throughput	[15958.724op/s; 15966.623op/s] or [-0.025%; +0.025%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/1_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	[49.989ms; 49.995ms] or [-0.007%; +0.007%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/1_senders/1us_delay	throughput	[18001.728op/s; 18004.103op/s] or [-0.007%; +0.007%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/1_senders/no_delay	execution_time	[341.829µs; 341.996µs] or [-0.025%; +0.025%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/1_senders/no_delay	throughput	[2631616.934op/s; 2632902.597op/s] or [-0.024%; +0.024%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	[56.883ms; 56.979ms] or [-0.085%; +0.085%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/10us_delay	throughput	[31591.594op/s; 31645.168op/s] or [-0.085%; +0.085%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	[50.009ms; 50.017ms] or [-0.009%; +0.009%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/1us_delay	throughput	[35987.692op/s; 35993.882op/s] or [-0.009%; +0.009%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay	execution_time	[890.130µs; 894.275µs] or [-0.232%; +0.232%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/2_senders/no_delay	throughput	[2013350.944op/s; 2022736.506op/s] or [-0.233%; +0.233%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	[57.421ms; 57.485ms] or [-0.056%; +0.056%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/10us_delay	throughput	[62625.838op/s; 62695.677op/s] or [-0.056%; +0.056%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	[50.030ms; 50.041ms] or [-0.010%; +0.010%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/1us_delay	throughput	[71941.705op/s; 71956.312op/s] or [-0.010%; +0.010%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/no_delay	execution_time	[2.279ms; 2.303ms] or [-0.519%; +0.519%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/4_senders/no_delay	throughput	[1565160.711op/s; 1581819.593op/s] or [-0.529%; +0.529%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/10us_delay	execution_time	[57.897ms; 57.977ms] or [-0.069%; +0.069%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/10us_delay	throughput	[124189.739op/s; 124360.923op/s] or [-0.069%; +0.069%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/1us_delay	execution_time	[50.085ms; 50.114ms] or [-0.028%; +0.028%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/1us_delay	throughput	[143674.645op/s; 143754.596op/s] or [-0.028%; +0.028%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/no_delay	execution_time	[5.827ms; 5.943ms] or [-0.987%; +0.987%]	None	None	None
trace_buffer/8_senders/no_delay	throughput	[1216563.415op/s; 1244545.756op/s] or [-1.137%; +1.137%]	None	None	None

Group 1

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
redis/obfuscate_redis_string	execution_time	29.416µs	30.367µs ± 1.288µs	29.580µs ± 0.101µs	31.783µs	32.586µs	33.161µs	33.235µs	12.36%	0.999	-0.821	4.23%	0.091µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
redis/obfuscate_redis_string	execution_time	[30.188µs; 30.545µs] or [-0.588%; +0.588%]	None	None	None

Group 2

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
tags/replace_trace_tags	execution_time	2.612µs	2.651µs ± 0.019µs	2.648µs ± 0.009µs	2.658µs	2.690µs	2.706µs	2.739µs	3.42%	1.381	3.157	0.70%	0.001µs	1	200
tags/replace_trace_tags_v04	execution_time	2.675µs	2.862µs ± 0.076µs	2.895µs ± 0.017µs	2.910µs	2.921µs	2.931µs	2.932µs	1.28%	-1.351	0.065	2.67%	0.005µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
tags/replace_trace_tags	execution_time	[2.648µs; 2.654µs] or [-0.097%; +0.097%]	None	None	None
tags/replace_trace_tags_v04	execution_time	[2.852µs; 2.873µs] or [-0.370%; +0.370%]	None	None	None

Group 3

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
sql/obfuscate_sql_string	execution_time	307.279µs	308.208µs ± 0.601µs	308.064µs ± 0.254µs	308.422µs	308.898µs	310.343µs	312.356µs	1.39%	3.028	14.853	0.19%	0.042µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
sql/obfuscate_sql_string	execution_time	[308.125µs; 308.291µs] or [-0.027%; +0.027%]	None	None	None

Group 4

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
ip_address/quantize_peer_ip_address_benchmark	execution_time	4.954µs	5.042µs ± 0.034µs	5.057µs ± 0.015µs	5.070µs	5.076µs	5.078µs	5.080µs	0.45%	-0.813	-0.899	0.68%	0.002µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
ip_address/quantize_peer_ip_address_benchmark	execution_time	[5.037µs; 5.047µs] or [-0.094%; +0.094%]	None	None	None

Group 5

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
credit_card/is_card_number/	execution_time	3.898µs	3.917µs ± 0.004µs	3.916µs ± 0.002µs	3.920µs	3.924µs	3.926µs	3.933µs	0.42%	0.187	3.127	0.10%	0.000µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/	throughput	254262455.202op/s	255289873.976op/s ± 253037.116op/s	255339369.667op/s ± 160238.777op/s	255463329.361op/s	255582875.938op/s	255689803.306op/s	256549985.309op/s	0.47%	-0.172	3.162	0.10%	17892.426op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/ 3782-8224-6310-005	execution_time	79.510µs	79.924µs ± 0.322µs	79.862µs ± 0.097µs	79.987µs	80.248µs	80.785µs	83.523µs	4.58%	7.355	77.260	0.40%	0.023µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/ 3782-8224-6310-005	throughput	11972740.920op/s	12512085.147op/s ± 48924.233op/s	12521670.067op/s ± 15210.504op/s	12534021.852op/s	12553076.975op/s	12566885.277op/s	12576990.396op/s	0.44%	-7.058	72.671	0.39%	3459.466op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/ 378282246310005	execution_time	73.015µs	73.576µs ± 0.378µs	73.544µs ± 0.128µs	73.660µs	73.924µs	74.093µs	78.164µs	6.28%	9.025	106.894	0.51%	0.027µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/ 378282246310005	throughput	12793583.341op/s	13591781.667op/s ± 66806.445op/s	13597251.997op/s ± 23732.273op/s	13622399.319op/s	13645403.306op/s	13664272.302op/s	13695822.824op/s	0.72%	-8.607	100.170	0.49%	4723.929op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631	execution_time	3.896µs	3.917µs ± 0.004µs	3.917µs ± 0.002µs	3.919µs	3.924µs	3.925µs	3.927µs	0.26%	-0.361	3.512	0.10%	0.000µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631	throughput	254658896.229op/s	255286589.553op/s ± 250279.089op/s	255312752.872op/s ± 154544.289op/s	255442913.930op/s	255599602.367op/s	255715759.821op/s	256667369.746op/s	0.53%	0.377	3.593	0.10%	17697.404op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005	execution_time	81.456µs	82.269µs ± 1.498µs	81.822µs ± 0.143µs	82.073µs	85.149µs	88.317µs	94.349µs	15.31%	4.481	24.939	1.82%	0.106µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005	throughput	10598958.338op/s	12158976.143op/s ± 205362.758op/s	12221616.662op/s ± 21428.082op/s	12238971.592op/s	12259875.121op/s	12270702.067op/s	12276615.503op/s	0.45%	-4.156	20.847	1.68%	14521.340op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631000521389798	execution_time	52.282µs	52.397µs ± 0.055µs	52.390µs ± 0.035µs	52.430µs	52.484µs	52.529µs	52.677µs	0.55%	0.934	2.388	0.11%	0.004µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631000521389798	throughput	18983502.045op/s	19084921.269op/s ± 20116.333op/s	19087508.186op/s ± 12766.957op/s	19098775.294op/s	19113321.318op/s	19118705.895op/s	19126976.688op/s	0.21%	-0.923	2.335	0.11%	1422.440op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331	execution_time	5.734µs	5.861µs ± 0.061µs	5.865µs ± 0.044µs	5.902µs	5.970µs	5.991µs	6.011µs	2.47%	0.125	-0.499	1.04%	0.004µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331	throughput	166374756.364op/s	170627990.630op/s ± 1777876.185op/s	170491238.750op/s ± 1269434.936op/s	172032933.097op/s	173468730.184op/s	174267912.283op/s	174393894.479op/s	2.29%	-0.079	-0.516	1.04%	125714.831op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/	execution_time	3.894µs	3.916µs ± 0.004µs	3.915µs ± 0.003µs	3.919µs	3.923µs	3.926µs	3.928µs	0.33%	-0.157	3.224	0.11%	0.000µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/	throughput	254579694.405op/s	255355968.189op/s ± 270898.958op/s	255415853.270op/s ± 176320.153op/s	255546151.657op/s	255662103.862op/s	255778247.344op/s	256812104.404op/s	0.55%	0.174	3.300	0.11%	19155.449op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 3782-8224-6310-005	execution_time	64.206µs	64.462µs ± 0.153µs	64.426µs ± 0.072µs	64.515µs	64.785µs	64.926µs	65.044µs	0.96%	1.260	1.461	0.24%	0.011µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 3782-8224-6310-005	throughput	15374314.291op/s	15513079.137op/s ± 36720.409op/s	15521759.476op/s ± 17450.359op/s	15536337.913op/s	15557705.445op/s	15565618.491op/s	15574950.807op/s	0.34%	-1.246	1.419	0.24%	2596.525op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 378282246310005	execution_time	57.263µs	57.605µs ± 0.118µs	57.585µs ± 0.066µs	57.669µs	57.816µs	57.981µs	58.081µs	0.86%	0.909	1.789	0.20%	0.008µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 378282246310005	throughput	17217370.189op/s	17359660.199op/s ± 35512.544op/s	17365554.561op/s ± 19856.472op/s	17383602.048op/s	17408226.519op/s	17421444.317op/s	17463188.802op/s	0.56%	-0.891	1.745	0.20%	2511.116op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631	execution_time	3.902µs	3.917µs ± 0.004µs	3.917µs ± 0.003µs	3.920µs	3.924µs	3.925µs	3.931µs	0.37%	0.233	0.782	0.10%	0.000µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631	throughput	254356363.328op/s	255267369.139op/s ± 249629.880op/s	255301353.097op/s ± 168815.584op/s	255460512.226op/s	255601938.737op/s	255656457.780op/s	256268901.463op/s	0.38%	-0.225	0.789	0.10%	17651.498op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/378282246310005	execution_time	54.619µs	54.928µs ± 0.183µs	54.884µs ± 0.105µs	55.022µs	55.278µs	55.445µs	55.529µs	1.17%	0.978	0.448	0.33%	0.013µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/378282246310005	throughput	18008540.772op/s	18205968.228op/s ± 60343.535op/s	18220134.790op/s ± 34846.473op/s	18246997.946op/s	18277256.796op/s	18294823.141op/s	18308724.107op/s	0.49%	-0.963	0.410	0.33%	4266.932op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631000521389798	execution_time	52.294µs	52.387µs ± 0.054µs	52.379µs ± 0.039µs	52.423µs	52.485µs	52.518µs	52.547µs	0.32%	0.479	-0.355	0.10%	0.004µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631000521389798	throughput	19030695.915op/s	19088785.889op/s ± 19541.416op/s	19091738.055op/s ± 14207.461op/s	19103389.419op/s	19117130.191op/s	19122110.610op/s	19122777.140op/s	0.16%	-0.475	-0.361	0.10%	1381.787op/s	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331	execution_time	5.701µs	5.868µs ± 0.058µs	5.869µs ± 0.035µs	5.904µs	5.965µs	5.987µs	5.992µs	2.10%	-0.100	-0.196	0.99%	0.004µs	1	200
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331	throughput	166877529.696op/s	170430546.683op/s ± 1692108.053op/s	170380379.691op/s ± 1016288.703op/s	171421946.807op/s	173425731.286op/s	174334209.250op/s	175421043.924op/s	2.96%	0.154	-0.154	0.99%	119650.108op/s	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
credit_card/is_card_number/	execution_time	[3.917µs; 3.918µs] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/	throughput	[255254805.465op/s; 255324942.487op/s] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/ 3782-8224-6310-005	execution_time	[79.879µs; 79.969µs] or [-0.056%; +0.056%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/ 3782-8224-6310-005	throughput	[12505304.719op/s; 12518865.575op/s] or [-0.054%; +0.054%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/ 378282246310005	execution_time	[73.523µs; 73.628µs] or [-0.071%; +0.071%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/ 378282246310005	throughput	[13582522.936op/s; 13601040.398op/s] or [-0.068%; +0.068%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631	execution_time	[3.917µs; 3.918µs] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631	throughput	[255251903.279op/s; 255321275.828op/s] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005	execution_time	[82.061µs; 82.477µs] or [-0.252%; +0.252%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005	throughput	[12130514.840op/s; 12187437.446op/s] or [-0.234%; +0.234%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631000521389798	execution_time	[52.390µs; 52.405µs] or [-0.015%; +0.015%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/37828224631000521389798	throughput	[19082133.339op/s; 19087709.199op/s] or [-0.015%; +0.015%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331	execution_time	[5.853µs; 5.870µs] or [-0.145%; +0.145%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number/x371413321323331	throughput	[170381594.090op/s; 170874387.171op/s] or [-0.144%; +0.144%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/	execution_time	[3.916µs; 3.917µs] or [-0.015%; +0.015%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/	throughput	[255318424.199op/s; 255393512.179op/s] or [-0.015%; +0.015%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 3782-8224-6310-005	execution_time	[64.441µs; 64.483µs] or [-0.033%; +0.033%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 3782-8224-6310-005	throughput	[15507990.041op/s; 15518168.232op/s] or [-0.033%; +0.033%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 378282246310005	execution_time	[57.589µs; 57.621µs] or [-0.028%; +0.028%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/ 378282246310005	throughput	[17354738.502op/s; 17364581.896op/s] or [-0.028%; +0.028%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631	execution_time	[3.917µs; 3.918µs] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631	throughput	[255232772.839op/s; 255301965.440op/s] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/378282246310005	execution_time	[54.902µs; 54.953µs] or [-0.046%; +0.046%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/378282246310005	throughput	[18197605.194op/s; 18214331.261op/s] or [-0.046%; +0.046%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631000521389798	execution_time	[52.379µs; 52.394µs] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/37828224631000521389798	throughput	[19086077.637op/s; 19091494.142op/s] or [-0.014%; +0.014%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331	execution_time	[5.860µs; 5.876µs] or [-0.137%; +0.137%]	None	None	None
credit_card/is_card_number_no_luhn/x371413321323331	throughput	[170196036.781op/s; 170665056.586op/s] or [-0.138%; +0.138%]	None	None	None

Group 1

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
two way interface	execution_time	15.002µs	15.679µs ± 0.218µs	15.634µs ± 0.095µs	15.745µs	16.113µs	16.287µs	16.815µs	7.55%	1.370	4.204	1.39%	0.015µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
two way interface	execution_time	[15.649µs; 15.709µs] or [-0.193%; +0.193%]	None	None	None

Group 2

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
write only interface	execution_time	1.073µs	1.087µs ± 0.005µs	1.088µs ± 0.003µs	1.091µs	1.095µs	1.098µs	1.102µs	1.31%	-0.380	0.242	0.49%	0.000µs	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
write only interface	execution_time	[1.086µs; 1.088µs] or [-0.068%; +0.068%]	None	None	None

Group 3

cpu_model	git_commit_sha	git_commit_date	git_branch
Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8259CL CPU @ 2.50GHz	`120b839`	1791292676	oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css

scenario	metric	min	mean ± sd	median ± mad	p75	p95	p99	max	peak_to_median_ratio	skewness	kurtosis	cv	sem	runs	sample_size
concentrator/add_spans_to_concentrator	execution_time	9.501ms	9.526ms ± 0.018ms	9.524ms ± 0.012ms	9.536ms	9.560ms	9.569ms	9.596ms	0.76%	0.837	0.508	0.18%	0.001ms	1	200

scenario	metric	95% CI mean	Shapiro-Wilk pvalue	Ljung-Box pvalue (lag=1)	Dip test pvalue
concentrator/add_spans_to_concentrator	execution_time	[9.524ms; 9.529ms] or [-0.026%; +0.026%]	None	None	None

Baseline

Omitted due to size.

…t-info-obfuscation-config-format

datadog-datadog-us1-prod · 2026-09-16T11:50:44Z

✅ All CI checks and tests passed.

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 75.68%
• Overall Coverage: 80.31% (+0.00%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.

🔗 Commit SHA: 120b839 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}

dd-octo-sts · 2026-09-16T12:11:38Z

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	9.08 MB	9.08 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	96.24 MB	96.24 MB	+0% (+4.29 KB) 👌

aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	107.62 MB	107.63 MB	+0% (+4.32 KB) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	12.20 MB	12.20 MB	+0% (+24 B) 👌

libdatadog-x64-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	29.13 MB	29.13 MB	+0% (+1.50 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	97.60 KB	97.60 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	191.89 MB	191.92 MB	+.01% (+32.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	817.94 MB	819.43 MB	+.18% (+1.49 MB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	9.74 MB	9.74 MB	+0% (+512 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	97.60 KB	97.60 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	27.57 MB	27.58 MB	+.02% (+8.00 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	55.74 MB	55.74 MB	+0% (+1.15 KB) 👌

libdatadog-x86-windows

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	25.47 MB	25.47 MB	+0% (+2.00 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	99.13 KB	99.13 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	197.17 MB	197.17 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	804.90 MB	805.82 MB	+.11% (+943.42 KB) 🔍
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll	7.56 MB	7.56 MB	+0% (+512 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	99.13 KB	99.13 KB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb	29.69 MB	29.69 MB	0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib	52.67 MB	52.67 MB	+0% (+1.24 KB) 👌

x86_64-alpine-linux-musl

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	86.23 MB	86.24 MB	+0% (+3.71 KB) 👌
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	10.07 MB	10.07 MB	0% (0 B) 👌

x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

Artifact	Baseline	Commit	Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a	102.08 MB	102.08 MB	+0% (+3.77 KB) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so	12.31 MB	12.31 MB	+0% (+24 B) 👌

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-09-16T13:31:10Z

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-16T13:35:04.710662Z	`ea2df3e`	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ea2df3eed0

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

ichinaski

Consider adding some tests to cover the new behavior.

APMSP-3720

The agent now send obfuscation_version = 2 when set with a custom sql obfuscation config to disable it for tracers which don't follow it. See DataDog/datadog-agent#54573

Eldolfin · 2026-09-18T12:45:23Z

Waiting for 1 more approve on the RFC then I'll merge this

…bfuscation-config-css

Eldolfin added 7 commits September 9, 2026 14:57

feat(data-pipeline): refactor agent's /info obfuscation config format

b3a818c

fix: lints

10fe24e

fix: make all obfuscation config fields default if missing

f06ddf4

feat: simplify tag_replace_rules, remove unused option

0bd084d

fix(lints): manually implement PartialEq for JsonObfuscatorConfig

0b668fb

fix(tests): rename http.remove_paths_with_digits -> remove_path_digits

2ab0cd4

fix: serde(default) to all obfuscation config components

4aaeae8

Eldolfin added this pull request to stack #2536 September 16, 2026 11:29

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into oscarld/refactor-agen…

fb76516

…t-info-obfuscation-config-format

Eldolfin force-pushed the oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css branch from a64b1d6 to ea2df3e Compare September 16, 2026 11:39

github-actions Bot added mini-agent data-pipeline labels Sep 16, 2026

Eldolfin changed the title ~~feat(data-pipeline): follow the full sql config in CSS obfuscation~~ feat(data-pipeline)!: follow the full sql config in CSS obfuscation Sep 16, 2026

Eldolfin marked this pull request as ready for review September 16, 2026 13:30

Eldolfin requested review from a team as code owners September 16, 2026 13:30

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Sep 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs Outdated

yannham reviewed Sep 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs Outdated

fix: tag replace rule ser/deser format

a03920e

yannham approved these changes Sep 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs Outdated

ichinaski reviewed Sep 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs Outdated

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs

Comment thread libdd-data-pipeline/src/trace_exporter/stats.rs Outdated

fix: tag_replace_rules=null parsing

3ac1f55

Eldolfin force-pushed the oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css branch from ea2df3e to f25b36b Compare September 17, 2026 13:05

Eldolfin requested a review from a team as a code owner September 17, 2026 13:05

style: rename schema's ObfuscationConfig -> AgentObfuscationConfig

164a508

Eldolfin added 6 commits September 17, 2026 15:09

feat(data-pipeline): follow the full sql config in CSS obfuscation

ad51db3

APMSP-3720

feat(data-pipeline): accept obfuscation_version = 2 too

bf9ab33

The agent now send obfuscation_version = 2 when set with a custom sql obfuscation config to disable it for tracers which don't follow it. See DataDog/datadog-agent#54573

test: obfuscation_version = 2 enables obfuscation

4610452

fix: only use "legacy" sql_obfuscation_mode as a fallback

0b0e703

style: rename and explain SUPPORTED_OBFUSCATION_VERSION_CUSTOM_CONFIG

174908c

test: add snapshot test verifying it follows the obfuscation config

06c1bc3

Eldolfin force-pushed the oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css branch from f25b36b to 06c1bc3 Compare September 17, 2026 13:09

fix(test): move integration tests in mod tracing_integration_tests

acd8b04

ichinaski approved these changes Sep 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

Base automatically changed from oscarld/refactor-agent-info-obfuscation-config-format to main September 21, 2026 12:47

Eldolfin added 2 commits September 29, 2026 18:07

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into oscarld/follow-full-o…

12ce37c

…bfuscation-config-css

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into oscarld/follow-full-o…

120b839

…bfuscation-config-css

gh-worker-dd-devflow-36fce6 Bot added mergequeue-status: queued mergequeue-status: in_progress and removed mergequeue-status: queued labels Oct 6, 2026

gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 278117f into main Oct 6, 2026
103 checks passed

gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the oscarld/follow-full-obfuscation-config-css branch October 6, 2026 15:06

gh-worker-dd-devflow-36fce6 Bot added mergequeue-status: done and removed mergequeue-status: in_progress labels Oct 6, 2026

Conversation

Eldolfin commented Sep 16, 2026 • edited by atlassian Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What does this PR do?

Motivation

Additional Notes

How to test the change?

Uh oh!

pr-commenter Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Benchmarks

Comparison

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

scenario:credit_card/is_card_number/378282246310005

Explanation

More details about the CI and significant changes

Candidate

Group 1

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Group 5

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Baseline

Uh oh!

datadog-datadog-us1-prod Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 • edited by datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codex Review Summary

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ichinaski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Eldolfin commented Sep 18, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Eldolfin commented Sep 16, 2026 •

edited by atlassian Bot

Loading

pr-commenter Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

datadog-datadog-us1-prod Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 •

edited by datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot

Loading

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading