fix(contrib/aws/datadog-lambda): collapse multi-line JSON before sorting log comparison

[joeyzhao2018]

What does this PR do?

• Fix flaky lambda integration test where log snapshot comparison fails because identical log lines appear at different
  positions across runs (non-deterministic Lambda/CloudWatch log ordering)
  • The previous fix (fix(contrib/aws/datadog-lambda): sort the logs to compare #4677) sorted both sides line-by-line before diffing, but this fragmented multi-line pretty-printed JSON
    blocks — lines like {, }, "v": 1 got scattered by sort, causing diff to misalign even when the logical content was identical
  • Before sorting, collapse multi-line JSON blocks into single lines using a perl one-liner, so each logical log entry is a
    single sortable unit

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 52285cdd5b

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".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[datadog-prod-us1-3]

🎉 All green!

❄️ No new flaky tests detected
🧪 All tests passed

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 60.87% (-0.05%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 94ba7a0 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-04-20 20:17:28

Comparing candidate commit 94ba7a0 in PR branch joey/fix-lambda-integration-test with baseline commit 21bb70d in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 1 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 205 metrics, 7 unstable metrics.

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:BenchmarkParallelMetrics/count/handle-reused-25

• 🟥 execution_time [+1.967ns; +8.735ns] or [+2.541%; +11.286%]

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.56%. Comparing base (21bb70d) to head (94ba7a0).

Additional details and impacted files

see 448 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.