Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
40.6% regression in page_cycler.tough_layout_cases at 408711:408804 |
||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Aug 1 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005542088289782944
,
Aug 1 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@408710 4530.89 295.885 12 good chromium@408804 4530.45 131.704 12 bad Bisect job ran on: winx64_zen_perf_bisect Bug ID: 633119 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests page_cycler.tough_layout_cases Test Metric: cold_times/page_load_time Relative Change: 0.12% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64_zen_perf_bisect/builds/326 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005542088289782944 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5787480926715904 | 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!
,
Aug 1 2016
Thank you Gmail.com sanchezlasandra445@Gmail.com Sanchezlasandra445@gmail.com
,
Aug 1 2016
The ref is moving at the same time, we can close this. |
|||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by alexclarke@chromium.org
, Aug 1 2016