chore: add pin type check

[quinna-h]

Small type check fix for expected Pin type

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
• 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

[github-actions[bot]]

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

releasenotes/notes/pymongo-check-pin-c3cb9d1fbdc82fb3.yaml              @DataDog/apm-python
ddtrace/contrib/internal/pymongo/client.py                              @DataDog/apm-core-python @DataDog/apm-idm-python

[datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn[bot]]

Datadog Report

Branch report: quinna.halim/pymongo-check-type-pin Commit report: fddd901 Test service: dd-trace-py

:white_check_mark: 0 Failed, 968 Passed, 228 Skipped, 27m 59.7s Total duration (11m 28.15s time saved)

[pr-commenter[bot]]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-10-30 14:03:00

Comparing candidate commit fddd901d8ec002ea329828707f5d661799c229c7 in PR branch quinna.halim/pymongo-check-type-pin with baseline commit 019ce15257885ebc1d520f5814e80f2ae6a67cf5 in branch main.

Found 1 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 372 metrics, 3 unstable metrics.

scenario:iast_aspects-rsplit_aspect

• 🟩 execution_time [-170.862ns; -141.401ns] or [-9.468%; -7.836%]

[erikayasuda]

Is this a chore or a fix? 🤔 Also should we backport this?

[quinna-h]

@erikayasuda Thank you for the callout! I just added a releasenote, and backport labels :)

[github-actions[bot]]

The backport to 2.13 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-2.13 2.13
# Navigate to the new working tree
cd .worktrees/backport-2.13
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-11145-to-2.13
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 f3b5275b8a6be8d3b7c8ab1e4e40ed96cb9aa386
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-11145-to-2.13
# Go back to the original working tree
cd ../..
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove .worktrees/backport-2.13

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.13 and the compare/head branch is backport-11145-to-2.13.