New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 677428 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner: ----
Closed: Jul 2017
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

51.7% regression in memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2 at 439839:439913

Project Member Reported by alexclarke@chromium.org, Dec 29 2016

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=677428

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg38jWowoM


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

chromium-rel-win8-dual
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Dec 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@439838  4.24587  3.89586  21  good
chromium@439913  4.6574   4.78363  21  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_8_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 677428

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
Test Metric: v8-gc-latency-mark-compactor_avg/v8-gc-latency-mark-compactor_avg
Relative Change: 9.69%

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisect/builds/2310
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8991948577117290272


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5019382919462912

| 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!
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 11 2017


=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
NO Perf regression found

Bisect Details
  Configuration: win_8_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
  Metric       : v8-gc-latency-mark-compactor_avg/v8-gc-latency-mark-compactor_avg

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@439838      4.05429 +- 3.24369      21      good
chromium@439913      4.7007 +- 4.11347       21      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982659740892789088

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5019382919462912


| 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 Speed>Bisection.  Thank you!
Status: WontFix (was: Untriaged)
This alert was found before M-60 branched. Closing as WontFix as this is believed to either be invalid or non-reproducible. 

Sign in to add a comment