[_heimdall]

Did no one call bullshit on the test before running it? Personally I'd just flat out refuse to run the test, likely designing the proper test comparing while third party scripts where enabled.

Management and product owners should understand how these things work, and shouldn't ask for bogus data when they do. But teams implementing the changes should just flat out refuse when they know the request isn't reasonable.

[SadCordDrone]

Sir, in most companies if you suggest something technical without having equivalent political power, at best, no one will listen to you. At worst you will create political enemies.

Probably there was an SDE-2 or SDE-3 who called bullshit on it and got ignored.

[_heimdall]

You call bullshit on it by either refusing to run the test, or better and more helpfully by running a test that answers the performance question.

I've seen these kinds of requests plenty of ways. Sometimes those asking include a design or specs because they honestly thought that was the right way to do it, other times they are knowingly asking for (in this case) a useless test to check a box. In either case, IMO the right response is to ask questions to clarify the goals and build to that, changing the provided design or specs if necessary.

I've had to play this out dozens of times over the years and never earned enemies from if, at one point I won over the PM leader that everyone on the dev team warned me about. Its all about tact and approach, assume everyone is on the up and up and just ask good questions to clarify the goals. Its hard to get mad at that unless its done in a condescending or argumentative way.