Skip to content

fix(llmobs): avoid missing ml app error if llmobs is disabled #13717

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 20, 2025

Conversation

Yun-Kim
Copy link
Contributor

@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim commented Jun 18, 2025

Our _start_span() method does a bunch of llmobs-instrumentation/modifications under the hood, even if LLMObs is disabled. Specifically our llm/task/tool/agent/retrieval/workflow/embeddings() methods only log a warning if ML_APP is missing, but still route to our _start_span() method, which then continues on to do a ML_APP check (and raises if this is missing), even if LLMObs is disabled. This means if ML_APP is missing, any manual instrumentation will break customer apps if they disable LLMObs.

We need to make _start_span() a no-op wrapper around tracer.trace(...). This fix ensures that if llmobs is disabled, we return the span immediately before we start doing llmobs-specific logic.

Checklist

  • PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • The PR description includes an overview of the change
  • The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
  • The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing strategy
  • The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • The change follows the library release note guidelines
  • The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

  • Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim requested review from a team as code owners June 18, 2025 20:48
@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim requested review from taegyunkim and tabgok June 18, 2025 20:48
Copy link
Contributor

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

releasenotes/notes/fix-llmobs-ml-app-disabled-7879e1fcb2d1e0da.yaml     @DataDog/apm-python
ddtrace/llmobs/_llmobs.py                                               @DataDog/ml-observability
tests/llmobs/test_llmobs_service.py                                     @DataDog/ml-observability

Copy link
Contributor

@sabrenner sabrenner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm just a release note suggestion

@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim enabled auto-merge (squash) June 18, 2025 20:55
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jun 18, 2025

Bootstrap import analysis

Comparison of import times between this PR and base.

Summary

The average import time from this PR is: 280 ± 3 ms.

The average import time from base is: 284 ± 5 ms.

The import time difference between this PR and base is: -3.9 ± 0.2 ms.

Import time breakdown

The following import paths have shrunk:

ddtrace.auto 2.133 ms (0.76%)
ddtrace.bootstrap.sitecustomize 1.449 ms (0.52%)
ddtrace.bootstrap.preload 1.449 ms (0.52%)
ddtrace.internal.remoteconfig.client 0.677 ms (0.24%)
ddtrace 0.685 ms (0.24%)
ddtrace.internal._unpatched 0.034 ms (0.01%)
json 0.034 ms (0.01%)
json.decoder 0.034 ms (0.01%)
re 0.034 ms (0.01%)
enum 0.034 ms (0.01%)
types 0.034 ms (0.01%)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Jun 18, 2025

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-06-18 21:49:25

Comparing candidate commit 80fb0cd in PR branch yunkim/llmobs-fix-start-span-disabled with baseline commit 55dd9fb in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 3 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 558 metrics, 3 unstable metrics.

scenario:iastaspectsospath-ospathbasename_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+374.151ns; +604.242ns] or [+8.807%; +14.224%]

scenario:iastaspectsospath-ospathsplitext_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+521.396ns; +641.090ns] or [+11.532%; +14.179%]

scenario:iastaspectssplit-splitlines_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+102.951ns; +136.888ns] or [+7.007%; +9.316%]

@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim merged commit 17ce936 into main Jun 20, 2025
463 of 466 checks passed
@Yun-Kim Yun-Kim deleted the yunkim/llmobs-fix-start-span-disabled branch June 20, 2025 21:09
Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.21 failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 1

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add .worktrees/backport-2.21 2.21
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-2.21
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-13717-to-2.21
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 17ce936ee286f1b66116843126854a52504b235f
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-13717-to-2.21
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-2.21

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.21 and the compare/head branch is backport-13717-to-2.21.

github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 20, 2025
Our `_start_span()` method does a bunch of
llmobs-instrumentation/modifications under the hood, even if LLMObs is
disabled. Specifically our
llm/task/tool/agent/retrieval/workflow/embeddings() methods only log a
warning if ML_APP is missing, but still route to our `_start_span()`
method, which then continues on to do a ML_APP check (and raises if this
is missing), even if LLMObs is disabled. This means if ML_APP is
missing, any manual instrumentation will break customer apps if they
disable LLMObs.

We need to make `_start_span()` a no-op wrapper around
`tracer.trace(...)`. This fix ensures that if llmobs is disabled, we
return the span immediately before we start doing llmobs-specific logic.

## Checklist
- [x] PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
- The PR description includes an overview of the change
- The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
- The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing
strategy
- The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- The change follows the [library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
- The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
- Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist
- [x] Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
- Title is accurate
- All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

(cherry picked from commit 17ce936)
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.

3 participants