> I believe there is already an EL-Kafka pipeline and this would make it
easy to integrate page views with our regular processing.

Note that the pipeline was disabled 6 months ago and thus my comment "in
the near term"
https://github.com/wikimedia/operations-puppet/commit/f85b1dbcd61bbb58684ff93704c1804e808a5d6e

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Toby Negrin <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'd also like us to consider routing this dataset to hadoop. I believe
> there is already an EL-Kafka pipeline and this would make it easy to
> integrate page views with our regular processing.
>
> Gilles -- are mobile page views included in your stream?
>
> -Toby
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Nuria Ruiz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >Great, then I guess it's a matter of only making the data go to files
>> and not to DB for the particular schema we'll create. Does >that sound like
>> something feasible? How much work would be required to set it up?
>> I do not think this is feasible on the near term w/o changes in our end.
>> I also am not sure it is really needed. You are concern about sending stuff
>> to db due to "volume", correct? I do not understand why logging every
>> single data point would be needed. Maybe you can explain that with a bit
>> more detail for us to grasp the use case?
>>
>> If it is a matter of identifying distinct requests that can be done
>> having sampled your dataset if it is large enough, we can help with that
>> and leila just put together some docs on this regard, while this is for
>> hive queries principles can apply elsewhere:
>> https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Analytics/Cluster/Hive/Counting_uniques
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 6:42 AM, Gilles Dubuc <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Right -- couldn't we just tag the URL?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The event of the user actually viewing the image is completely
>>> disconnected from the URL hit in Media Viewer, which is why we need EL and
>>> can't rely on existing server logs.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Eventlogging data currently does go to files, as well as to the DB.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great, then I guess it's a matter of only making the data go to files
>>> and not to DB for the particular schema we'll create. Does that sound like
>>> something feasible? How much work would be required to set it up?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Andrew Otto <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eventlogging data currently does go to files, as well as to the DB.
>>>> Check it out on stat1003 at /srv/eventlogging/archive.
>>>>
>>>> If you need something with higher throughput then eventlogging itself
>>>> supports…then let’s talk :D
>>>>
>>>> -Ao
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 6, 2015, at 13:28, Erik Zachte <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You mean attach an X-analytics parameter, for extra images beyond the
>>>> one the user initially requested.
>>>>
>>>> But then we would undercount, basically missing all image views from
>>>> clicking right arrow in image viewer.
>>>> I'm not sure how much we would miss then.
>>>> iirc Gilles said this browsing feature was used quite a long, but I'm
>>>> not sure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [
>>>> mailto:[email protected]
>>>> <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Toby Negrin
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 06, 2015 19:16
>>>> *To:* A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who
>>>> has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Analytics] Making EventLogging output to a log file
>>>> instead of the DB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right -- couldn't we just tag the URL?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Erik Zachte <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just to clarify, this is about prefetched images which have not been
>>>> shown to the public.
>>>>
>>>> They were sent to the browser ahead of a possible request to speed
>>>> things up but in many cases never actually requested.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Media_file_request_counts#Prefetched_images
>>>>
>>>> - Erik
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Toby Negrin
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 06, 2015 18:49
>>>> *To:* A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who
>>>> has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics.
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Analytics] Making EventLogging output to a log file
>>>> instead of the DB
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Gilles -- why won't the page view logs work by themselves for this
>>>> purpose? EL can be configured to write into Hadoop which is probably the
>>>> best way to get the throughput you need but it seems overcomplicated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Toby
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Gilles Dubuc <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This depends on [1] so we're not going to need that immediately, but in
>>>> order to help Erik Zachte with his RfC [2] to track unique media views in
>>>> Media Viewer, I'm going to need to use something almost exactly like
>>>> EventLogging. The main difference being that it should skip writing to the
>>>> database and write to a log file instead.
>>>>
>>>> That's because we'll be recording around 20-25M image views per day,
>>>> which would needlessly overload EventLogging for little purpose since the
>>>> data will be used for offline stats generation and doesn't need to be made
>>>> available in a relational database. Of course if storage space and
>>>> EventLogging capacity were no object, we could just use EL and keep the
>>>> ever-growing table forever, but I have the impression that we want to be
>>>> reasonable here and only write to a log, since that's what Erik needs.
>>>>
>>>> So here's the question: for a specific schema, can EventLogging work
>>>> the way it does but only record hits to a log file (maybe it already does
>>>> that before hitting the DB?) and not write to the DB? If not, how difficult
>>>> would it be to make EL capable of doing that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T44815
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Media_file_request_counts
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Analytics mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Analytics mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Analytics mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Analytics mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Analytics mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Analytics mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Analytics mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
>
>
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics

Reply via email to