On Apr 7, 2011, at 8:11 AM, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote: > I've also just added a section with the stats that the Adobe Flash > player exposes.
Great. Perhaps Silverlight stats might be of use too - though they're fairly similar: http://learn.iis.net/page.aspx/582/advanced-logging-for-iis-70---client-logging/ > Apart from the statistics that are not currently available from the > HTML5 player, there are stats that are already available, such as > currentSrc, currentTime, and all the events which can be turned into > hooks for measurement. Yes, the network and ready states are very useful to determine if clients are stalling for buffering etc. > I think the page now has a lot of analysis of currently used stats - > probably a sufficient amount. All the video publishing sites likely > just use a subpart of the ones that Adobe Flash exposes in their > analytics. Especially all the separate A/V bytecounts are overkill IMO. One useful metric I didn't list for JW Player but is very nice is Flash's "isLive" property. Kind regards, Jeroen > On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Mark Watson <[email protected]> wrote: >> All, >> >> I added some material to the wiki page based on our experience here at >> Netflix and based on the metrics defined in MPEG DASH for adaptive >> streaming. I'd love to here what people think. >> >> Statistics about presentation/rendering seem to be covered, but what should >> also be considered are network performance statistics, which become >> increasingly difficult to collect from the server when sessions are making >> use of multiple servers, possibly across multiple CDNs. >> >> Another aspect important for performance management is error reporting. Some >> thoughts on that on the page. >> >> ...Mark >> >> On Mar 31, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Chris Pearce <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 1/04/2011 12:22 p.m., Steve Lacey wrote: >>>> >>>>> Chris - in the mozilla stats, I agree on the need for a frame count of >>>>> frames that actually make it the the screen, but am interested in why we >>>>> need both presented and painted? Wouldn't just a simple 'presented' (i.e. >>>>> presented to the user) suffice? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> We distinguish between "painted" and "presented" so we have a measure of >>>> the latency in our rendering pipeline. It's more for our benefit as browser >>>> developers than for web developers. >>>> >>> >>> Yeah, just to be clear, we don't necessarily think that everything in our >>> stats API should be standardized. We should wait and see what authors >>> actually use. >>> >>> Rob >>> -- >>> "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for >>> they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures >>> every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11] >>> >> >>
