Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
103.2%-158% regression in v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop at 493941:493970 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Aug 14 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971299800884935328
,
Aug 14 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-incremental-step_max/browse_news/browse_news_flipboard Revision Result N chromium@493948 3.89819 +- 3.02011 21 good chromium@493970 3.82248 +- 3.0753 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 --story-filter=browse.news.flipboard v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971299800884935328 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 14 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971291166600172400
,
Aug 14 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971291160836569840
,
Aug 14 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: mac_pro_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-incremental-step_max/browse_news/browse_news_flipboard Revision Result N chromium@493940 3.15333 +- 3.13117 21 good chromium@493968 3.163 +- 2.89105 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 --story-filter=browse.news.flipboard v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971291166600172400 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 14 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-incremental-step_max/browse_news/browse_news_flipboard Revision Result N chromium@493948 3.51843 +- 2.04575 21 good chromium@493970 3.53643 +- 1.77189 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 --story-filter=browse.news.flipboard v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971291160836569840 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 14 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971282860491720208
,
Aug 14 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971282839565623808
,
Aug 14 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_x64_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : V8 C++:duration_avg/browse_media/browse_media_tumblr Revision Result N chromium@492999 284.031 +- 161.091 21 good chromium@493979 281.836 +- 30.7325 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=browse.media.tumblr v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971282860491720208 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 15 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Bisect was unable to run to completion Error: INFRA_FAILURE The bisect was able to narrow the range, you can try running with: good_revision: 4769a142e668eef25d2d3378777e97c0ea0e08c0 bad_revision : a2d345d5b1fdd4c871344c58d928774e5bfa4be1 If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error. Bisect Details Configuration: win_x64_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-incremental-step_max/browse_social/browse_social_twitter Revision Result N chromium@492999 1.43983 +- 0.204247 6 good chromium@493244 1.45683 +- 0.167985 6 good chromium@493367 1.39633 +- 0.131762 6 good chromium@493383 4.47183 +- 2.51423 6 bad chromium@493398 4.7305 +- 0.718481 6 bad chromium@493428 4.47983 +- 2.47441 6 bad chromium@493489 4.0785 +- 2.6811 6 bad chromium@493979 4.55417 +- 1.20972 6 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=browse.social.twitter v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971282839565623808 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 16 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971114613203250032
,
Mar 14 2018
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Aug 14 2017