Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
5.3% regression in jetstream at 433848:433911 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee graphs below.
,
Nov 28 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994710831701581952
,
Nov 29 2016
===== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===== Status: failed === Bisection aborted === The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence. Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error. ===== TESTED REVISIONS ===== Revision Mean Std Dev N Good? chromium@433847 153.958 7.13851 24 good chromium@433911 154.417 2.41523 24 bad Bisect job ran on: win_8_perf_bisect Bug ID: 669238 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests jetstream Test Metric: Score/Score Relative Change: None Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisect/builds/2282 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994710831701581952 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5283381531639808 | 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!
,
Nov 29 2016
This is low and it looks like things are recovering.
,
Apr 11 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982624461194052608 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by benhenry@chromium.org
, Nov 28 2016