Skip to content

fix(trace-utils): fix forward compatibility for string streaming - #2295

Open
anais-raison wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
anais/fix-forward-compatibility-stream-streaming
Open

fix(trace-utils): fix forward compatibility for string streaming#2295
anais-raison wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
anais/fix-forward-compatibility-stream-streaming

Conversation

@anais-raison

@anais-raison anais-raison commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Fixes a forward-compatibility bug in the v1 msgpack decoder: when skipping an unknown key (e.g. a field added by a newer tracer version), inline strings inside the skipped value were not interned into the shared StringTable. This desynced the table's indices, so any later reference to a previously-interned string by ID would resolve to the wrong value.

Motivation

APMSP-3836

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

📚 Documentation Check Results

⚠️ 763 documentation warning(s) found

📦 libdd-trace-utils - 763 warning(s)


Updated: 2026-08-06 13:01:33 UTC | Commit: 54c8f00 | missing-docs job results

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Artifact Size Benchmark Report

aarch64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 87.14 MB 87.14 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 8.01 MB 8.01 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.77 MB 10.77 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 98.41 MB 98.41 MB +0% (+8 B) 👌
libdatadog-x64-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 26.00 MB 26.00 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 89.18 KB 89.18 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 187.95 MB 187.94 MB -0% (-16.00 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 979.41 MB 979.32 MB -0% (-93.62 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 8.47 MB 8.47 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 89.18 KB 89.18 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 25.05 MB 25.05 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x64-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 49.85 MB 49.85 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
libdatadog-x86-windows
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 22.64 MB 22.64 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 90.58 KB 90.58 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 192.62 MB 192.62 MB -0% (-8.00 KB) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/debug/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 968.48 MB 968.37 MB --.01% (-112.52 KB) 💪
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.dll 6.54 MB 6.54 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 90.58 KB 90.58 KB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/dynamic/datadog_profiling_ffi.pdb 26.91 MB 26.91 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/libdatadog-x86-windows/release/static/datadog_profiling_ffi.lib 47.44 MB 47.44 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
x86_64-alpine-linux-musl
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 77.73 MB 77.73 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-alpine-linux-musl/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 8.91 MB 8.91 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Artifact Baseline Commit Change
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.a 93.24 MB 93.24 MB 0% (0 B) 👌
/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/libdatadog_profiling.so 10.85 MB 10.85 MB 0% (0 B) 👌

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🔒 Cargo Deny Results

⚠️ 2 issue(s) found, showing only errors (advisories, bans, sources)

📦 libdd-trace-utils - 2 error(s)

Show output
error[vulnerability]: Invalid pointer dereference in `fmt::Pointer` impl for `Atomic` and `Shared` when the underlying pointer is invalid
   ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:61:1
   │
61 │ crossbeam-epoch 0.9.18 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
   │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ security vulnerability detected
   │
   ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0204
   ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0204
   ├ Affected versions of `fmt::Display` dereference the underlying pointer. This causes a invalid pointer dereference e.g., when a pointer created with `Atomic::null` or `Shared::null`. `fmt::Debug` impls and pre-0.9 `fmt::Display` impls, which do not dereference pointers, are not affected by this issue.
   ├ Announcement: https://github.com/crossbeam-rs/crossbeam/pull/1276
   ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.9.20 (try `cargo update -p crossbeam-epoch`)
   ├ crossbeam-epoch v0.9.18
     └── crossbeam-deque v0.8.5
         └── rayon-core v1.12.1
             └── rayon v1.10.0
                 └── criterion v0.5.1
                     ├── libdd-common v5.1.0
                     │   ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v3.0.0
                     │   │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0
                     │   │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
                     │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
                     ├── (dev) libdd-trace-normalization v3.0.0
                     │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
                     └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)

error[unsound]: Rand is unsound with a custom logger using `rand::rng()`
    ┌─ /home/runner/work/libdatadog/libdatadog/Cargo.lock:181:1
    │
181 │ rand 0.8.5 registry+https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io-index
    │ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ unsound advisory detected
    │
    ├ ID: RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ Advisory: https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0097
    ├ It has been reported (by [@lopopolo](https://github.com/lopopolo)) that the `rand` library is [unsound](https://rust-lang.github.io/unsafe-code-guidelines/glossary.html#soundness-of-code--of-a-library) (i.e. that safe code using the public API can cause Undefined Behaviour) when all the following conditions are met:
      
      - The `log` and `thread_rng` features are enabled
      - A [custom logger](https://docs.rs/log/latest/log/#implementing-a-logger) is defined
      - The custom logger accesses `rand::rng()` (previously `rand::thread_rng()`) and calls any `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods on `ThreadRng`
      - The `ThreadRng` (attempts to) reseed while called from the custom logger (this happens every 64 kB of generated data)
      - Trace-level logging is enabled or warn-level logging is enabled and the random source (the `getrandom` crate) is unable to provide a new seed
      
      `TryRng` (previously `RngCore`) methods for `ThreadRng` use `unsafe` code to cast `*mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>` to `&mut BlockRng<ReseedingCore>`. When all the above conditions are met this results in an aliased mutable reference, violating the Stacked Borrows rules. Miri is able to detect this violation in sample code. Since construction of [aliased mutable references is Undefined Behaviour](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nomicon/references.html), the behaviour of optimized builds is hard to predict.
    ├ Announcement: https://github.com/rust-random/rand/pull/1763
    ├ Solution: Upgrade to >=0.10.1 OR <0.10.0, >=0.9.3 OR <0.9.0, >=0.8.6 (try `cargo update -p rand`)
    ├ rand v0.8.5
      ├── (dev) libdd-common v5.1.0
      │   ├── libdd-capabilities-impl v3.0.0
      │   │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0
      │   │       └── (dev) libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
      ├── (dev) libdd-trace-normalization v3.0.0
      │   └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
      ├── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)
      └── proptest v1.5.0
          └── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1
              ├── (dev) libdd-tinybytes v1.1.1 (*)
              └── libdd-trace-utils v9.0.0 (*)

advisories FAILED, bans ok, sources ok

Updated: 2026-08-06 13:03:26 UTC | Commit: 54c8f00 | dependency-check job results

@datadog-prod-us1-4

datadog-prod-us1-4 Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Pipelines  Tests

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

semver-check | validate   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

🔧 Fix in code. This looks caused by changes in this PR. Major API changes detected in libdd-trace-utils without a breaking change marker in the PR title or body.

Required checks pass | allchecks   View in Datadog   GitHub Actions

See error Some checks have failed or timed out, please check the workflow run summary to get the details.
📋 Copy prompt for your agent
CI on my pull request is failing. Help me find and fix the root cause of each failing job below — they were flagged as caused by changes in this PR, so focus on the diff. For each job, explain the failure and propose a fix.

Branch: anais/fix-forward-compatibility-stream-streaming

semver-check | validate
Commit: 54c8f00f9cfdab003fb52757f7196e63bde13fb8
Error (code / build):
Major API changes detected in libdd-trace-utils without a breaking change marker in the PR title or body.
CI job: https://github.com/DataDog/libdatadog/actions/runs/31103855387/job/92625419242

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 97.37%
Overall Coverage: 75.41% (+0.65%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 7970c7d | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@ajgajg1134
ajgajg1134 marked this pull request as ready for review July 29, 2026 15:14
@ajgajg1134
ajgajg1134 requested review from a team as code owners July 29, 2026 15:14

@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: ac8e79eff6

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".

match value {
rmpv::ValueRef::String(s) => {
if let Some(s) = (*s).into_str() {
table.record(&T::Text::from_static_str(s));

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Preserve ownership for skipped interned strings

When decoding owned bytes, this records a string borrowed from the just-skipped buffer as from_static_str, so if a future/unknown field contains the first occurrence of a string and a later known field references that ID, the decoded payload can contain a BytesString that does not retain the original Bytes allocation. In the common from_bytes(Bytes::from(Vec<_>)) path, a payload like unknown key "ghost" followed by span service ref 1 leaves service pointing at memory owned only by the decoder buffer after it is dropped; this should record skipped strings via a path that preserves the backing Bytes ownership (or copies) rather than treating them as static.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

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.

This needs to be addressed. The 'static lifetime is actually a lie since the string you're getting is actually a reference to the Bytes buffer, to make sure the Bytes refcount is correctly updated you need to create a ByteString from the slice with from_bytes_slice

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.

By the way, how it's possible in safe code? I haven't looked at record or from_static_str, but should one of the two be marked as unsafe if there are additional pre-conditions to hold? As this PR shows, this seems to be actually possible to hit.

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.

Ok, I just looked and the culprit is as_mut_slice from the decoding buffer. Why does this method return a &'static?? It's obviously not, if T::Bytes is owning memory... Honestly we're very lucky Codex spotted this. I would have written the same code as @anais-raison here without giving it a second thought and would probably have never find that at review time either. Something went really wrong with the as_mut_slice design/implementation

@Eldolfin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Code lgtm but the tests are hard to read, and it might be over-tested.
Maybe replace it all with 1 test looking more like this: https://github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pull/53918/changes#diff-b911ac5eb14f27a9241c4e2fee3769ca5c57f8d66e05dfb5328a253400170855R229

(I don't think we need 1 test per field)

@ajgajg1134

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Code lgtm but the tests are hard to read, and it might be over-tested. Maybe replace it all with 1 test looking more like this: https://github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pull/53918/changes#diff-b911ac5eb14f27a9241c4e2fee3769ca5c57f8d66e05dfb5328a253400170855R229

(I don't think we need 1 test per field)

(This is my fault lol as I originally provided these tests for this ticket after a quick claude generation and didn't clean them up to be PR ready before sharing them :P Sorry!)

match value {
rmpv::ValueRef::String(s) => {
if let Some(s) = (*s).into_str() {
table.record(&T::Text::from_static_str(s));

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.

This needs to be addressed. The 'static lifetime is actually a lie since the string you're getting is actually a reference to the Bytes buffer, to make sure the Bytes refcount is correctly updated you need to create a ByteString from the slice with from_bytes_slice

@pr-commenter

pr-commenter Bot commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Benchmarks

Comparison

Benchmark execution time: 2026-08-06 13:32:56

Comparing candidate commit 7970c7d in PR branch anais/fix-forward-compatibility-stream-streaming with baseline commit b1cf6f0 in branch main.

Found 13 performance improvements and 17 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 107 metrics, 2 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:vec_map/as_deduped_map/already_deduped/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+0.585ns; +0.594ns] or [+4.214%; +4.275%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_10/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+28.371ns; +28.624ns] or [+8.003%; +8.074%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_2/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+28.040ns; +28.241ns] or [+6.009%; +6.052%]

scenario:vec_map/as_deduped_map/needs_dedup_1_in_4/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+26.321ns; +26.854ns] or [+6.640%; +6.775%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/128

  • 🟩 execution_time [-872.288ns; -865.812ns] or [-5.525%; -5.484%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+470440.987op/s; +473965.484op/s] or [+5.803%; +5.846%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/16

  • 🟩 execution_time [-24.268ns; -22.776ns] or [-9.498%; -8.914%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+6170785.799op/s; +6531095.530op/s] or [+9.852%; +10.427%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/64

  • 🟩 execution_time [-237.670ns; -232.601ns] or [-5.655%; -5.534%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+892701.355op/s; +911517.515op/s] or [+5.863%; +5.986%]

scenario:vec_map/contains_key/8

  • 🟩 execution_time [-3.698ns; -3.580ns] or [-4.966%; -4.807%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+5430863.572op/s; +5603658.343op/s] or [+5.056%; +5.217%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/128

  • 🟩 execution_time [-1.057µs; -1.050µs] or [-7.848%; -7.800%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+804577.624op/s; +809439.477op/s] or [+8.463%; +8.514%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/16

  • 🟥 execution_time [+12.706ns; +12.944ns] or [+6.340%; +6.459%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-4846416.324op/s; -4758234.706op/s] or [-6.070%; -5.959%]

scenario:vec_map/get_hit/64

  • 🟩 execution_time [-342.045ns; -338.120ns] or [-9.214%; -9.109%]
  • 🟩 throughput [+1729182.993op/s; +1748170.973op/s] or [+10.029%; +10.140%]

scenario:vec_map/get_miss/128

  • 🟩 execution_time [-4.154ns; -4.014ns] or [-5.147%; -4.973%]

scenario:vec_map/get_miss/16

  • 🟥 execution_time [+17.005ns; +17.423ns] or [+165.304%; +169.375%]

scenario:vec_map/get_miss/64

  • 🟥 execution_time [+21.239ns; +21.328ns] or [+71.574%; +71.874%]

scenario:vec_map/get_miss/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+12.439ns; +12.644ns] or [+212.142%; +215.649%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/128

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.975µs; +2.079µs] or [+14.346%; +15.105%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-1225410.022op/s; -1161363.060op/s] or [-13.175%; -12.487%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/16

  • 🟥 execution_time [+14.719ns; +25.984ns] or [+5.305%; +9.366%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-5240813.984op/s; -3071224.497op/s] or [-8.987%; -5.267%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/64

  • 🟥 execution_time [+490.815ns; +529.211ns] or [+12.720%; +13.715%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-2015442.813op/s; -1864535.414op/s] or [-12.143%; -11.234%]

scenario:vec_map/get_mut/8

  • 🟥 execution_time [+4.075ns; +9.473ns] or [+4.557%; +10.595%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-9054171.320op/s; -3808922.278op/s] or [-9.900%; -4.165%]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-08-06 13:29:12

Comparing candidate commit 7970c7d in PR branch anais/fix-forward-compatibility-stream-streaming with baseline commit b1cf6f0 in branch main.

Found 2 performance improvements and 4 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 69 metrics, 10 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:concentrator/add_spans_to_concentrator

  • 🟩 execution_time [-1.020ms; -1.012ms] or [-10.557%; -10.477%]

scenario:datadog_sample_span/name_pattern_rule_not_matching/wall_time

  • 🟩 execution_time [-7.132ns; -7.009ns] or [-4.377%; -4.302%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_backtrack_match/wall_time

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.659ns; +1.680ns] or [+4.496%; +4.554%]

scenario:glob_matcher/ascii_wildcard_question_match/wall_time

  • 🟥 execution_time [+2.908ns; +2.924ns] or [+7.898%; +7.940%]

scenario:trace_buffer/4_senders/no_delay

  • 🟥 execution_time [+164.786µs; +196.610µs] or [+7.062%; +8.426%]
  • 🟥 throughput [-122490.883op/s; -102123.805op/s] or [-7.926%; -6.609%]

Candidate

Omitted due to size.

Baseline

Omitted due to size.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants