Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
654% regression in top_10_mobile_memory at 401863:402866 |
||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Jul 6 2016
===== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===== Status: completed === Bisection aborted === The bisect was aborted because The metric values for the initial "good" and "bad" revisions do not represent a clear regression. Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error. === Warnings === The following warnings were raised by the bisect job: * Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence. ===== TESTED REVISIONS ===== Revision Mean Std Dev N Good? chromium@401862 5050168 1002537 19 good chromium@402866 4501822 867569 16 bad Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect Bug ID: 626050 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests top_10_mobile_memory Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:allocated_objects_size_avg/https___www.google.com__hl_en_q_science Relative Change: 12.56% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6658 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007865745959807360 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6382593231028224 | 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!
,
Jul 7 2016
One alert, bisect didn't reproduce, no ref build. |
|||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by qyears...@chromium.org
, Jul 6 2016