chore(config): Refactor secrets loading to avoid use of futures::executor::block_on

[jszwedko]

Since the caller was async no need to have the nested functions be sync.

I spent an hour or so trying to keep SecretBackendLoader#retrieve in a functional processing style, but gave up and went for the simpler approach of iterating and mutating.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Szwedko [email protected]

[datadog-vectordotdev]

Datadog Report

Branch report: jszwedko/remove-usages-of-block
Commit report: 234994f
Test service: vector

✅ 0 Failed, 7 Passed, 0 Skipped, 25.5s Total Time

[bruceg]

Since you were unable to find a functional-style mechanism for this (possibly due to interactions with async calls), would it make sense to just loop over backend.retrieve(…) instead of using map_ok and map_err?

[jszwedko]

Good thought, that is clearer. I made this change in 34964f4

[github-actions]

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 2a621853-51c4-477a-bbdb-00cd5ef4b6e6 Metrics dashboard

Baseline: 61b1b18
Comparison: e601b9b

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

Significant changes in experiment optimization goals

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

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	links
✅	syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics	ingress throughput	+5.26	[+5.08, +5.43]

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	links
✅	file_to_blackhole	egress throughput	+16.06	[+8.65, +23.48]

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	links
✅	file_to_blackhole	egress throughput	+16.06	[+8.65, +23.48]
✅	syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics	ingress throughput	+5.26	[+5.08, +5.43]
➖	syslog_splunk_hec_logs	ingress throughput	+1.92	[+1.77, +2.07]
➖	splunk_hec_route_s3	ingress throughput	+1.91	[+1.60, +2.22]
➖	http_text_to_http_json	ingress throughput	+1.48	[+1.35, +1.62]
➖	http_to_http_acks	ingress throughput	+1.05	[-0.27, +2.37]
➖	http_to_s3	ingress throughput	+0.66	[+0.39, +0.93]
➖	fluent_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	+0.46	[-0.03, +0.95]
➖	syslog_regex_logs2metric_ddmetrics	ingress throughput	+0.33	[+0.19, +0.47]
➖	http_to_http_noack	ingress throughput	+0.17	[+0.09, +0.26]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs_acks	ingress throughput	+0.16	[-0.04, +0.36]
➖	http_to_http_json	ingress throughput	+0.08	[+0.01, +0.14]
➖	syslog_loki	ingress throughput	+0.05	[-0.02, +0.12]
➖	splunk_hec_indexer_ack_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.06, +0.10]
➖	socket_to_socket_blackhole	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.03, +0.07]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_noack	ingress throughput	+0.01	[-0.08, +0.10]
➖	splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_acks	ingress throughput	+0.01	[-0.12, +0.14]
➖	otlp_http_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.07	[-0.21, +0.06]
➖	otlp_grpc_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.32	[-0.44, -0.20]
➖	syslog_log2metric_tag_cardinality_limit_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.42	[-0.51, -0.34]
➖	syslog_humio_logs	ingress throughput	-0.96	[-1.09, -0.83]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole	ingress throughput	-1.76	[-1.89, -1.64]
➖	syslog_log2metric_splunk_hec_metrics	ingress throughput	-1.95	[-2.08, -1.83]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs	ingress throughput	-2.30	[-2.48, -2.13]
➖	http_elasticsearch	ingress throughput	-2.51	[-2.68, -2.35]
➖	datadog_agent_remap_blackhole_acks	ingress throughput	-4.58	[-4.73, -4.43]

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".