All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=629334

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgysDrrAsM


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

chromium-rel-win7-dual

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006755253331208096

===== 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@405220  1.03333  0.0145521  18  good
chromium@405763  1.05111  0.0499869  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 629334

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests service_worker.service_worker_micro_benchmark
Test Metric: concurrent_1_response_90_percentile/concurrent_1_response_90_percentile
Relative Change: 4.75%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6712
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006755253331208096


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5908964823269376

| 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!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006698198870094784

===== 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@405220  1.02944  0.0171403  18  good
chromium@405763  1.05028  0.0393503  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 629334

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests service_worker.service_worker_micro_benchmark
Test Metric: concurrent_1_response_90_percentile/concurrent_1_response_90_percentile
Relative Change: 1.46%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6714
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006698198870094784


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5241801246507008

| 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!

We can see the same regression in "ref" measurements.
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=629334