Add "drop samples with category" transform

[canova]

This is useful for cases where I want to drop all the "idle" category samples, so I can focus on non-idle samples. Or it can be useful for dropping the whole profiler overhead by removing the "profiler" category.

I would like to use this transform in the pq cli tool, so we can remove the idle category before finding the "top functions". Otherwise the idle category just pollutes the output of the cli a lot.

Example profile: deploy preview
Use the drop samples with category transform on the idle category above.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 88.63636% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.39%. Comparing base (e17e396) to head (5ab25fb).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/profile-logic/transforms.ts	90.62%	3 Missing ⚠️
src/components/shared/CallNodeContextMenu.tsx	66.66%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5943   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   85.38%   85.39%           
=======================================
  Files         322      322           
  Lines       32101    32143   +42     
  Branches     8849     8860   +11     
=======================================
+ Hits        27410    27448   +38     
- Misses       4260     4263    +3     
- Partials      431      432    +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

[mstange]

Hmm, in the deploy preview, if I drop samples with category JavaScript, it also drops samples with category DOM where the stack contains a JS function.

[canova]

Oh, I'm currently removing all the samples if they contain the category anywhere in their stack. It makes more sense to drop them if that category is the leaf only.

[canova]

I guess I was following how drop-function does, and it also drops the samples if any of the frame in the stack contains it. I updated the code to look at leaf only now. Is it better?

[mstange]

It's definitely more in line with my expectations. But now it's a bit confusing that you apply the filter by clicking a call node which will often still be there even with the filter applied. But maybe it's good enough.

[canova]

Yeah, I think it's a reasonable until we have something better.

[flodolo]

Is there a reason to use "Drop", vs something like "Ignore" or "Remove"?

[canova]

We already have other "Drop ... " transforms, and I wanted to keep it consistent with the others. For example, we have two other transforms called: Drop samples with this function and Drop samples outside of markers matching .... So it was a natural choice to use drop here too.

Also, I think "remove" could be a bit ambiguous because several other transforms remove things. For example, we have "collapse" and "merge". That's another reason I preferred "drop".

[flodolo]

Makes sense.

[flodolo]

Makes sense.

[flodolo]

Suggested change

	# "Drop samples with category" transform.
	# "Drop samples with category" transform (drop is a verb, as in remove)