chore: update celery latest version to 5.6.3

[dd-octo-sts]

Update celery lockfiles and dependency package lockfiles.
This performs the following updates:

1. Some celery locks use celery latest. This updates that package and its dependencies.
2. Some locks pin celery but use the latest version of another package. This updates those dependencies.

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Circular import analysis

⚠️ Existing circular imports

There are 1 circular imports that already exist on the base branch and have not been changed by this PR.

ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_injector -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.callbacks -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.collector -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_reporting -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_injector

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Codeowners resolved as

Resolved from the full PR diff against main using the target branch CODEOWNERS file.
CODEOWNERS team requests not listed below are not required by the current file set.

.riot/requirements/1509aa1.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/19507e4.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/1df4aa0.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/1edaced.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/654f8c0.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/c61da82.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
.riot/requirements/dbc6a48.txt                                          @DataDog/apm-python
scripts/integration_registry/registry.yaml                              @DataDog/apm-idm-python
supported_versions.json                                                 @DataDog/python-guild @DataDog/apm-idm-python

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 47ecc15bbe

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".

[datadog-prod-us1-6]

 

✨ Unblock PR with BitsAI

❌ Errors

Your PR has failed checks. Please review the issues below and take necessary action before merging.

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-py | contrib/celery 1/4 — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-py | contrib/celery 2/4 — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 33449a2 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-06 01:21:11

Comparing candidate commit 33449a2 in PR branch upgrade-latest-celery-version with baseline commit 9480aea in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 5 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 608 metrics, 10 unstable metrics, 8 known flaky benchmarks, 16 flaky benchmarks without significant changes.

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:httppropagationextract-empty_headers

• 🟥 execution_time [+103.807ns; +125.927ns] or [+14.171%; +17.191%]

scenario:iastaspects-format_noaspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+42.218µs; +49.458µs] or [+14.189%; +16.623%]

scenario:iastaspectsremodule-re_expand_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+87.098µs; +96.771µs] or [+13.762%; +15.290%]

scenario:msgpackencoderscenario-simple_one_span

• 🟥 execution_time [+422.754ns; +492.767ns] or [+10.073%; +11.741%]

scenario:openfeatureflagevaluation-hook-enqueue-typical

• 🟥 execution_time [+1.766µs; +1.929µs] or [+8.265%; +9.029%]

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:coreapiscenario-context_with_data_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-741.640ns; +728.730ns] or [-7.098%; +6.975%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_1_listener

• unstable execution_time [-35.574ns; +42.223ns] or [-5.333%; +6.330%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_50_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-1915.826ns; +1934.970ns] or [-9.556%; +9.652%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_exception_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-1672.045ns; +1898.701ns] or [-8.822%; +10.018%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-383.935ns; +375.814ns] or [-8.922%; +8.733%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_no_args_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-212.465ns; +247.452ns] or [-7.846%; +9.138%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_1_listener

• unstable execution_time [-101.489ns; +90.555ns] or [-7.280%; +6.496%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_50_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-5062.905ns; +4241.238ns] or [-10.431%; +8.738%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-1068.942ns; +841.590ns] or [-10.312%; +8.119%]

scenario:packagesupdateimporteddependencies-import_many_stdlib_cached

• unstable execution_time [-56.496µs; +52.536µs] or [-9.928%; +9.232%]

Known flaky benchmarks

These benchmarks are marked as flaky and will not trigger a failure. Modify FLAKY_BENCHMARKS_REGEX to control which benchmarks are marked as flaky.

scenario:httppropagationinject-ids_only

• 🟥 execution_time [+2.983µs; +3.112µs] or [+20.800%; +21.703%]

scenario:iastaspects-lower_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+101.138µs; +105.777µs] or [+42.022%; +43.949%]

scenario:iastaspects-upper_noaspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+37.761µs; +42.781µs] or [+22.113%; +25.053%]

scenario:iastaspectsospath-ospathbasename_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+150.123µs; +154.744µs] or [+40.274%; +41.514%]

scenario:iastaspectssplit-rsplit_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+25.903µs; +30.274µs] or [+16.800%; +19.635%]

scenario:span-start

• 🟥 execution_time [+1.156ms; +1.584ms] or [+9.054%; +12.403%]

scenario:telemetryaddmetric-1-count-metric-1-times

• 🟥 execution_time [+266.794ns; +297.547ns] or [+13.648%; +15.222%]

scenario:tracer-small

• 🟥 execution_time [+42.165µs; +43.595µs] or [+17.173%; +17.755%]

Known flaky benchmarks without significant changes:

• scenario:errortrackingflasksqli-baseline
• scenario:flasksimple-iast-get
• scenario:iastaspects-casefold_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-casefold_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-index_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-ljust_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-replace_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-rstrip_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-swapcase_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-title_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-translate_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-translate_noaspect
• scenario:packagespackageforrootmodulemapping-cache_off
• scenario:packagespackageforrootmodulemapping-cache_on
• scenario:sethttpmeta-all-enabled
• scenario:telemetryaddmetric-record-100-metrics

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Dependency direction analysis

⚠️ Existing dependency direction violations

There are 201 dependency direction violations that already exist on the base branch and have not been changed by this PR.

Show existing violations (showing 5 of 201 highest severity)

ddtrace.internal.tracemethods -×-> ddtrace.trace  (internal-core -> product:tracing, score=132)
ddtrace.internal.ci_visibility.recorder -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:ci_visibility -> product:tracing, score=130)
ddtrace.llmobs._integrations.mcp -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:llmobs -> product:tracing, score=130)
ddtrace.internal.test_visibility.api -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:ci_visibility -> product:tracing, score=130)
ddtrace.llmobs._integrations.anthropic -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:llmobs -> product:tracing, score=130)

To see all violations, download the layers-base.json and layers-pr.json artifacts from this CI job and run:

uv run --script scripts/import-analysis/layers.py compare layers-base.json layers-pr.json

[linear-code]

AIF-5

[emmettbutler]

/merge

[gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351]

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-09-09 17:56:44 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

---

2026-09-09 17:56:51 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: Pull request is not mergeable yet

It will be processed automatically as soon as GitHub reports it as mergeable. View in MergeQueue UI.

• Run /code blockers to see what is blocking it.
• Run /remove to cancel it.

---

2026-09-09 22:19:25 UTC ⚠️ MergeQueue: This merge request was unqueued

devflow unqueued this merge request: It did not become mergeable within the expected time

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-06T00:53:25.258090Z	33449a2	New commits

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.