Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
19%-19.3% regression in tracing.tracing_with_debug_overhead at 426464:426571 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Oct 25 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997836156076759312
,
Oct 25 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@426463 26867.1 1297.59 18 good chromium@426571 27128.8 1730.02 18 bad Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect Bug ID: 659057 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests tracing.tracing_with_debug_overhead Test Metric: Max number of events per second_avg/Max number of events per second_avg Relative Change: 2.84% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1216 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997836156076759312 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4974819207020544 | 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 25 2016
This looks like a false alert, the ref moved at the same time. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by alexclarke@chromium.org
, Oct 25 2016