All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=599473

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiKa2qAoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8P3WqAkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8MGw-ggM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiLnlugoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiNiQtwoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiMKqqQkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8JvGvAoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiJmLvwoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8JuNsgoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8NuytgoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg8P3WqAoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiIzeowoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiIzFsgoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiOiLtQoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiLy9sQkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgiJnBtwoM


Bot(s) for this bug's original alert(s):

chromium-rel-win10
chromium-rel-win7-dual
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-ati
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-intel
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia
chromium-rel-win7-x64-dual

So far I only suspect: "Revert SimpleCache fieldtrial testing information on windows."  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/688b2ddd12857e078b629d3d7be1574efdb712e6 

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author gavinp@chromium.org ===

Hi gavinp@chromium.org, the bisect results pointed to your CL below as possibly
causing a regression. Please have a look at this info and see whether
your CL be related.


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Revert SimpleCache fieldtrial testing information on windows.
Author  : gavinp
Commit description:
  
This is not needed for the beta push, and the current state of
SimpleCache on windows makes this a regression.

BUG= 596100 ,490029
TBR=asvitkine

Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/1843633005

Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#383994}
Commit  : 688b2ddd12857e078b629d3d7be1574efdb712e6
Date    : Wed Mar 30 16:13:31 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                Mean Value  Std. Dev.   Num Values  Good?
chromium@383981         749.31      26.414783   5           good
chromium@383991         774.3775    15.906106   5           good
chromium@383993         764.32425   19.235767   5           good
chromium@383994         1452.84475  127.954344  5           bad         <-
chromium@383996         1228.98275  189.737306  5           bad
chromium@384000         1325.36375  164.238481  5           bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 599473

Test Command: python src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --also-run-disabled-tests page_cycler_site_isolation.basic_oopif
Test Metric: cold_times/http___www.ebay.com
Relative Change: 76.88%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1595
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9016661008597517008


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=599473

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

+ nasko@ for page_cycler.basic_oopif

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Revert SimpleCache fieldtrial testing information on windows.
Author  : gavinp
Commit description:
  
This is not needed for the beta push, and the current state of
SimpleCache on windows makes this a regression.

BUG= 596100 ,490029
TBR=asvitkine

Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/1843633005

Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#383994}
Commit  : 688b2ddd12857e078b629d3d7be1574efdb712e6
Date    : Wed Mar 30 16:13:31 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                Mean Value  Std. Dev.   Num Values  Good?
chromium@383979         447.607656  14.646371   8           good
chromium@383989         453.1625    16.017494   8           good
chromium@383992         445.168     5.77507     5           good
chromium@383993         440.69325   9.028815    5           good
chromium@383994         568.13475   32.606324   5           bad         <-
chromium@383999         626.50775   194.36206   5           bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64_10_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 599473

Test Command: python src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --also-run-disabled-tests page_cycler.morejs
Test Metric: cold_times/www.techcrunch.com
Relative Change: 38.83%
Score: 99.8

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64_10_perf_bisect/builds/491
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9016661073600821696


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=599473

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

based on bisect results, gavinp@ could you please check the issue.

So, I think that this can be closed. The thing is, the Simple Cache experiment is not moving to beta on windows, and so we shouldn't be running perf tests on it.

I'm really curious that switching back to the blockfile cache (standard on Windows) caused a regression; if the simple cache is outperforming blockfile on windows in any configuration, that's news to me and worth learning about. So that's interesting to learn.

But if performance regressed because I switched testing back to the blockfile cache, then that's just a signal that we should get more aggressive about retiring the blockfile cache; it's not a reason to run our perf bots in a different configuration than the users have...

can we close this issue? could someone please check and suggest.

Ping gavinp@, can you close the bug?