Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
9.7% regression in scheduler.tough_scheduling_cases at 422426:422458 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Oct 10 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8999170439222703696
,
Oct 10 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@422425 0.0508609 0.00146974 18 good chromium@422458 0.0515312 0.00178927 18 bad Bisect job ran on: mac_10_10_perf_bisect Bug ID: 654473 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests scheduler.tough_scheduling_cases Test Metric: queueing_durations/queueing_durations Relative Change: 1.72% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_10_10_perf_bisect/builds/2435 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8999170439222703696 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5256990605967360 | 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!
,
Oct 10 2016
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by qyears...@chromium.org
, Oct 10 2016