Certainly; running now. On 12 March 2015 at 18:33, Toby Negrin <tneg...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Can we compare the monthly totals? > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Oliver Keyes <oke...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> Well, again; the wikistats data that Erik refers to doesn't have any >> granularity within the period this dataset covers. Monthly data misses >> sub-monthly noise - like a massive transition that only kicks in on >> the day-by-day. >> >> On 12 March 2015 at 18:21, Toby Negrin <tneg...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> > I'm also confused. As I understand it, stats.wikimedia.org is consuming >> > the >> > data that is represented by the green line in your graph. Therefore we >> > would >> > see this drop in the wikistats data that Erik referred to, but we don't. >> > I >> > think we need to understand why this is so. >> > >> > -Toby >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Oliver Keyes <oke...@wikimedia.org> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Well, I'm no longer our resident anything expert, merely /a/ anything >> >> expert :). >> >> >> >> The "concoction", as you put it, comes from the webrequest_all_sites >> >> data that is consumed by stats.wikimedia.org's primary report - I >> >> can't speak for how the dashboard you're linking to is constructed. >> >> Perhaps you could? I doubt this is a "concoction" problem given that, >> >> as you will note if you've studied the visualisations, both the UDF >> >> and the hive query implementation (which were written by two different >> >> people, and code reviewed by two /more/ people) agree that this >> >> dramatic, unexplained and untracked drop happened. And, since we've >> >> been using the hive query implementation for all our high-level >> >> numbers for about six months, a bug of this magnitude in the >> >> /implementation/ of the definition would be....worrying. >> >> >> >> Indeed, your report says 20B per month (again, is it drawing from the >> >> same data source as the aggregate, high-level number?) - I never >> >> claimed 1.1B a day, you did. Instead, it started off as approximately >> >> 1.1-1.2Bn, before dropping down to between 600m and 700m, where it has >> >> resided ever since. That sounds, averaged, like approximately 0.75B, >> >> no? The disadvantage of comparing a single monthly number against a >> >> more granular dataset. >> >> >> >> On 12 March 2015 at 17:55, Erik Zachte <ezac...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> >> > I'd rather see you explain this, Oliver, as our incumbent page views >> >> > expert. >> >> > Your concoction of legacy PV seems to suggest 'Old definition, UDF' >> >> > was >> >> > about 1.1B per day. >> >> > >> >> > Yet >> >> > http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyAllProjects.htm >> >> > shows 20B per month, 0.75B per day >> >> > >> >> > Erik >> >> > >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> >> > From: analytics-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > [mailto:analytics-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Oliver >> >> > Keyes >> >> > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 19:38 >> >> > To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who >> >> > has >> >> > an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. >> >> > Subject: [Analytics] [Technical] final pageviews QA >> >> > >> >> > Hey all, >> >> > >> >> > After the patches to the definition following the previous >> >> > hand-coding >> >> > run (see older threads) I've run a second set of tests. These can be >> >> > seen at >> >> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pageviews_QA_2.png and >> >> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pageviews_QA_jittered_2.png >> >> > >> >> > There's nothing particularly shocking in the new definition; it >> >> > follows >> >> > the seasonal pattern that we're used to. I think we can call the new >> >> > definition done, with these tweaks! It's also not as unstable as the >> >> > legacy >> >> > definition (good luck to whoever now has the responsibility of >> >> > explaining >> >> > why pageviews abruptly halved in the middle of February). >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Have fun, >> >> > -- >> >> > Oliver Keyes >> >> > Research Analyst >> >> > Wikimedia Foundation >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Analytics mailing list >> >> > Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Analytics mailing list >> >> > Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Oliver Keyes >> >> Research Analyst >> >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Analytics mailing list >> >> Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Analytics mailing list >> > Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Oliver Keyes >> Research Analyst >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics > > > > _______________________________________________ > Analytics mailing list > Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >
-- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
