chore(deps): Bump async-trait from 0.1.82 to 0.1.83

[dependabot[bot]]

Bumps async-trait from 0.1.82 to 0.1.83.

Release notes

Sourced from async-trait's releases.

0.1.83

• Prevent needless_arbitrary_self_type lint being produced in generated code (#278)

Commits

• e6b4d47 Release 0.1.83
• bfe8d61 Merge pull request #278 from dtolnay/arbself
• 7bd974b Ignore needless_arbitrary_self_type clippy lint in generated code
• b53b4e7 Add regression test for issue 277
• See full diff in compare view

Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting @dependabot rebase.

---

Dependabot commands and options

You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR: - `@dependabot rebase` will rebase this PR - `@dependabot recreate` will recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it - `@dependabot merge` will merge this PR after your CI passes on it - `@dependabot squash and merge` will squash and merge this PR after your CI passes on it - `@dependabot cancel merge` will cancel a previously requested merge and block automerging - `@dependabot reopen` will reopen this PR if it is closed - `@dependabot close` will close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually - `@dependabot show ignore conditions` will show all of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency - `@dependabot ignore this major version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself) - `@dependabot ignore this minor version` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself) - `@dependabot ignore this dependency` will close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)

[github-actions[bot]]

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 6d3cc12e-b9f6-4068-b78d-3f808f2b35c9 Metrics dashboard

Baseline: f8e030c61411e92721bcc04751771d56030ef6df Comparison: 463eb4340a86faab64d11dfc691c18f36efa2a1d

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

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

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

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

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 | +31.67 | [+23.49, +39.86] | |

Fine details of change detection per experiment

| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | links | |------|---------------------------------------------------|--------------------|----------|------------------|-------| | ✅ | file_to_blackhole | egress throughput | +31.67 | [+23.49, +39.86] | | | ➖ | socket_to_socket_blackhole | ingress throughput | +3.74 | [+3.66, +3.82] | | | ➖ | syslog_regex_logs2metric_ddmetrics | ingress throughput | +3.63 | [+3.48, +3.77] | | | ➖ | otlp_grpc_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +2.68 | [+2.56, +2.80] | | | ➖ | syslog_loki | ingress throughput | +2.66 | [+2.56, +2.76] | | | ➖ | otlp_http_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +2.62 | [+2.48, +2.75] | | | ➖ | syslog_log2metric_splunk_hec_metrics | ingress throughput | +2.54 | [+2.46, +2.62] | | | ➖ | datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs_acks | ingress throughput | +2.17 | [+1.99, +2.35] | | | ➖ | syslog_log2metric_humio_metrics | ingress throughput | +1.52 | [+1.40, +1.63] | | | ➖ | http_text_to_http_json | ingress throughput | +1.36 | [+1.23, +1.49] | | | ➖ | http_to_http_acks | ingress throughput | +1.16 | [-0.07, +2.39] | | | ➖ | datadog_agent_remap_datadog_logs | ingress throughput | +0.75 | [+0.55, +0.95] | | | ➖ | syslog_humio_logs | ingress throughput | +0.63 | [+0.51, +0.75] | | | ➖ | datadog_agent_remap_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.39 | [+0.28, +0.50] | | | ➖ | http_to_s3 | ingress throughput | +0.28 | [+0.01, +0.55] | | | ➖ | http_to_http_noack | ingress throughput | +0.07 | [+0.02, +0.13] | | | ➖ | datadog_agent_remap_blackhole_acks | ingress throughput | +0.07 | [-0.05, +0.19] | | | ➖ | syslog_splunk_hec_logs | ingress throughput | +0.05 | [-0.06, +0.15] | | | ➖ | http_to_http_json | ingress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.01, +0.07] | | | ➖ | splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_acks | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.11, +0.12] | | | ➖ | splunk_hec_indexer_ack_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.08, +0.08] | | | ➖ | splunk_hec_to_splunk_hec_logs_noack | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.09, +0.09] | | | ➖ | http_elasticsearch | ingress throughput | -0.50 | [-0.70, -0.31] | | | ➖ | syslog_log2metric_tag_cardinality_limit_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.67 | [-0.77, -0.57] | | | ➖ | splunk_hec_route_s3 | ingress throughput | -0.71 | [-1.02, -0.41] | | | ➖ | fluent_elasticsearch | ingress throughput | -2.27 | [-2.75, -1.79] | |

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".