Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
7% regression in media.tough_video_cases_extra at 399974:400004 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionThis is a regression in garden2_10s.webm_seek_cold.
,
Jul 11 2016
,
Jul 11 2016
Alert looks invalid actually. The ref went up too.
,
Jul 11 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@399973 549.761 19.3096 18 good chromium@400004 546.093 17.985 18 bad Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect Bug ID: 627162 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests media.tough_video_cases_extra Test Metric: seek/garden2_10s.webm_seek_cold Relative Change: 0.92% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1707 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007409020373774960 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5909404268888064 | 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! |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by w...@chromium.org
, Jul 11 2016