1966672 - 4.9% damp custom.netmonitor.exportHar (Windows) regression on Tue May 6 2025

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(DevTools :: Netmonitor, defect)

Description

[Treeherder Bug Filer]

Perfherder has detected a devtools performance regression from push 8e679d9052f356e90bda052f09eccde5e3a810cc. As author of one of the patches included in that push, we need your help to address this regression.

Please acknowledge, and begin investigating this alert within 3 business days, or the patch(es) may be backed out in accordance with our regression policy. Our guide to handling regression bugs has information about how you can proceed with this investigation.

If you have any questions or need any help with the investigation, please reach out to [e-mail]. Alternatively, you can find help on Slack by joining #perf-help, and on Matrix you can find help by joining #perftest.

Regressions:

Ratio	Test	Platform	Options	Absolute values (old vs new)
5%	damp custom.netmonitor.exportHar	windows11-64-24h2-shippable	e10s fission stylo webrender	270.66 -> 283.91

Details of the alert can be found in the alert summary, including links to graphs and comparisons for each of the affected tests.

If you need the profiling jobs you can trigger them yourself from treeherder job view or ask [e-mail] to do that for you.

You can run all of these tests on try with ./mach try perf --alert 45052

The following documentation link provides more information about this command.

Comment 1

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

Set release status flags based on info from the regressing bug 1956394

Comment 2

[Dão Gottwald [:dao]]

Bug 1956394 could only possibly affect a test when running with tab groups present in vertical tabs mode, which I'm pretty sure is not a scenario we run devtools perf tests with. I expect that this was wrongly attributed.

Comment 3

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

The Bugbug bot thinks this bug should belong to the 'DevTools::Netmonitor' component, and is moving the bug to that component. Please correct in case you think the bot is wrong.

Comment 4

[Donal Meehan [:dmeehan]]

:afinder could you take a look at Comment 2?
Looks like the regressor is incorrect here.
Side note, I took a look at the alert in Comment 0. The graph seems to have returned to the previous range?

Comment 5

[Alex Finder]

(In reply to Donal Meehan [:dmeehan] from comment #4)

:afinder could you take a look at Comment 2?
Looks like the regressor is incorrect here.
Side note, I took a look at the alert in Comment 0. The graph seems to have returned to the previous range?

Thanks Donal! Based on some more retriggers on the graph, I am reassigning the alert to the regression reported on bug 1967930. Sorry for the confusion here!