1600253 - 0.31 - 0.31% Base Content JS (linux64, linux64-qr, linux64-shippable, linux64-shippable-qr) regression on push ac5f26e57e503b1ebc46ae049e6dd9e95afb10da (Mon November 25 2019)

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Firefox :: Search, defect, P1)

Description

[Marian Raiciof [:marauder]]

We have detected an awsy regression from push:

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?changeset=ac5f26e57e503b1ebc46ae049e6dd9e95afb10da

As author of one of the patches included in that push, we need your help to address this regression.

Regressions:

0.31% Base Content JS linux64 opt 3,880,153.33 -> 3,892,196.00
0.31% Base Content JS linux64-qr opt 3,880,290.67 -> 3,892,302.67
0.31% Base Content JS linux64-shippable opt 3,880,145.33 -> 3,892,260.00
0.31% Base Content JS linux64-shippable-qr opt 3,880,188.00 -> 3,892,370.67

You can find links to graphs and comparison views for each of the above tests at: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perf.html#/alerts?id=24135

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

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Mike's going to look into this. Our current theory is that we might be able to avoid setting the timeout if we know the page isn't one of the provider's that we are monitoring.

Comment 2

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

The regressing changes seem to be in SearchTelemetryChild.jsm (try push, comparison

I tried backing out the exporting symbol on its own, I also tried removing the imports of XPCOM and setTimeout/clearTimeout however none of those seemed to clear it.

Comment 3

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

Hi, are there any status updates on this bug?

Comment 4

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

I'm currently out of ideas, so passing back to Mike

Comment 5

[Dale Harvey (:daleharvey)]

Mark investigated this and couldnt find a specific regresion, this code has also changed a lot over the last 7 months so dont think this is actionable, closing out