[AGENTRUN-142] compute instanceID in the server for configcheck command and configcheck flare

[GustavoCaso]

What does this PR do?

Modify the config-check response to include the checkID of all the integration config instances.

Motivation

Ensure the instance ID from the status and configcheck command matches. Prior to this change the instance ID in the configcheck command was wrong. The problem is that we compute the check ID in the client, using scrubbed integration config information. That causes the information to be different from the status command

Describe how you validated your changes

• Ensure the status and configcheck command display the same check ID
• Ensure the config-check.log from the flare matches the check ID as well.

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

[GustavoCaso]

I couldn't import the this library in the autodiscovery component because of import cycle. Seeing that the only reason that we include it here is because integration.Data#GetNameForInstance(), I change the function signature to get the instance name string and instead of using integration.Data I used []byte

[vickenty]

How does the cycle look like? I think ideally imports should reflect flow of data - autodiscovery provides data via subscriptions to multiple users, of which collector is just one example. It should not have any need to import any of the collector.

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor ef7a913a0322e789822800b939b29393ac7c9351

Diff per package

package	diff	status	size	ancestor	threshold
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb	0.00MB	✅	446.01MB	446.00MB	0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb	0.00MB	✅	61.90MB	61.90MB	0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm	0.00MB	✅	61.97MB	61.97MB	0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse	0.00MB	✅	61.97MB	61.97MB	0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb	0.00MB	✅	41.39MB	41.39MB	0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm	0.00MB	✅	41.47MB	41.47MB	0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse	0.00MB	✅	41.47MB	41.47MB	0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb	0.00MB	✅	39.65MB	39.65MB	0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb	0.00MB	✅	59.14MB	59.14MB	0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm	0.00MB	✅	59.21MB	59.21MB	0.50MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm	-0.00MB	✅	867.77MB	867.77MB	0.50MB
datadog-agent-amd64-deb	-0.00MB	✅	868.68MB	868.69MB	0.50MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb	-0.00MB	✅	858.02MB	858.02MB	0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm	-0.00MB	✅	878.45MB	878.46MB	0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse	-0.00MB	✅	878.45MB	878.46MB	0.50MB

Decision

✅ Passed

[GustavoCaso]

@clamoriniere For this PR I decided to leave the cluster check v1 untouched. We currently do not scrub the integration config information, which is something that we need to do, but it would require more changes. This PR is already big enough, that I think is best to limit the size.

Once we merge this one and validate everything works as expected we can open a new PR that focus on scrubbing the integration config and precompute the check ID for the cluster check

[cit-pr-commenter]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: ecf75d6c-e620-4ce8-8089-91065c64e7e1

Baseline: ef7a913
Comparison: 2ddd23b
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	+0.54	[+0.49, +0.60]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	+0.40	[+0.35, +0.44]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.14	[+0.08, +0.20]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.04	[-0.73, +0.82]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1	egress throughput	+0.02	[-0.81, +0.84]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.03, +0.04]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.00	[-0.67, +0.67]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.27, +0.27]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.00	[-0.63, +0.63]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2	egress throughput	-0.01	[-0.78, +0.76]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.76, +0.72]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.82, +0.78]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	-0.03	[-0.10, +0.03]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load	egress throughput	-0.11	[-0.58, +0.35]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu	% cpu utilization	-0.40	[-1.28, +0.48]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	-2.75	[-5.70, +0.19]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed	links
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10
✅	quality_gate_idle	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	intake_connections	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory_usage	10/10	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	intake_connections	10/10
✅	quality_gate_logs	lost_bytes	10/10
✅	quality_gate_logs	memory_usage	10/10

Explanation

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

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

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".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

• quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.