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

Issue 719525 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: WontFix
Owner: ----
Closed: Jul 2017
Cc:
█ kraynov@google.com
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

51.4% regression in page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif at 469086:469263

Project Member Reported by kraynov@chromium.org, May 8 2017 
See the link to graphs below.

Comment 1 by kraynov@chromium.org, May 8 2017 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=719525

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgIDgiv33rQoM


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

win-zenbook
Project Member

Comment 4 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, May 8 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64_zen_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif
  Metric       : timeToFirstContentfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/http___www.cnn.com

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@469085      1568.49 +- 120.048      20      good
chromium@469263      1595.25 +- 259.314      21      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=http...www.cnn.com page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8980151503641847408

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4624569819725824


| 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!
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, May 8 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64_zen_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif
  Metric       : timeToFirstContentfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/http___www.cnn.com

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@469085      1568.21 +- 83.6499      21      good
chromium@469263      1558.09 +- 62.1223      20      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=http...www.cnn.com page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8980151512010529024

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5218001558700032


| 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!
Project Member

Comment 8 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, May 9 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64_zen_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif
  Metric       : timeToFirstContentfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/http___www.cnn.com

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@469085      1572.61 +- 78.3936      21      good
chromium@469263      1564.52 +- 70.1273      21      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=http...www.cnn.com page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8980122384822202576

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5218001558700032


| 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!
Project Member

Comment 9 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, May 9 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64_zen_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif
  Metric       : timeToFirstContentfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/http___www.cnn.com

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@469085      1562.6 +- 81.6902       21      good
chromium@469263      1565.02 +- 38.5516      21      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=http...www.cnn.com page_cycler_v2_site_isolation.basic_oopif

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8980122386820803728

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4624569819725824


| 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!

Comment 10 by benhenry@chromium.org, Jul 27 2017

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