Closed
Bug 1451732
Opened 7 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
54.98 - 55.92% Resident Memory (windows7-32) regression on push 149a759643fbf35d45d4ffbc86706db8ba2d4ffd (Wed Apr 4 2018)
Categories
(Firefox :: Untriaged, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
INVALID
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox-esr52 | --- | unaffected |
firefox59 | --- | unaffected |
firefox60 | --- | unaffected |
firefox61 | + | wontfix |
People
(Reporter: igoldan, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: perf, regression)
We have detected an awsy regression from push: https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?changeset=149a759643fbf35d45d4ffbc86706db8ba2d4ffd As author of one of the patches included in that push, we need your help to address this regression. Regressions: 56% Resident Memory windows7-32 pgo stylo 313,699,622.34 -> 489,110,071.85 55% Resident Memory windows7-32 opt stylo 320,724,810.05 -> 497,050,205.40 You can find links to graphs and comparison views for each of the above tests at: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perf.html#/alerts?id=12520 On the page above you can see an alert for each affected platform as well as a link to a graph showing the history of scores for this test. There is also a link to a treeherder page showing the jobs in a pushlog format. To learn more about the regressing test(s), please see: https://wiki.mozilla.org/AWSY/Tests
Comment 1•7 years ago
|
||
That regression range seems highly improbable.
status-firefox59:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox60:
--- → unaffected
status-firefox61:
--- → affected
status-firefox-esr52:
--- → unaffected
tracking-firefox61:
--- → +
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•7 years ago
|
||
This is a huge perf regression for which I cannot find the culprit. I started doing retriggers & backfills for previous changesets. I then noticed that the new values are equal to those when this 1st happened. This is strange and I'm thinking that maybe something happened with the environment. :jmaher Do you have any clue about this? Who can we ask for more details?
Reporter | ||
Comment 3•7 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM] from comment #1) > That regression range seems highly improbable. I agree. The range message was automatically generated and it is not valid at all.
Comment 7•7 years ago
|
||
Almost certainly an infra change and not an actual product change.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•