Hi Michael On Fri, Mar 15, 2013, Michael Snow <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not sure why you would use traffic ranking for financial analysis, > even the envelope-and-napkin kind of analysis we're engaging in here. I'm > pretty confident that just because Google has been sitting at #1 for some > time, it doesn't mean that their core operational costs have remained flat > over that period. > I'm actually not using the traffic for financial analysis. I'm only using the trend in traffic to compare the hosting costs - I think it would be fair to assume that both are intrinsically linked. :) The analysis of 6M/ year wasn't based on traffic at all, it was from the annual budget and expenditure I saw in the reports, though that was an envelope-and-napkin kind of analysis, it wasn't entirely based on conjectures either. I also think its unfair to compare Wikipedia with google, but if you were to take a top 10 traffic website and separate their infrastructure and cap-ex, and look at annual operational costs especially with things like bandwidth cost, it would have to be comparable. (Maybe not for google but let's say for twitter or linked.in - comparable bandwidth usage *is* the reason they are in the same league.) > Aside from that, it's only recently that Wikimedia sites have approached > having the kind of redundancy and failover capabilities we've talked about > needing for a long time. That's at least one example of something that can > add pretty significant costs without having a material impact on traffic > (except in emergencies, of course). I wouldn't know about the redundancies or those capabilities, it seems fairly the same. My location and perspective might have more to do with that but I just don't see the change as that dramatic. I wouldn't say there isn't any change, from a performance stand-point, it just seems incrementally better - outages still happen[1], there are occasionally things that break, and minor lag issues persist on the other side of the world. I'm grateful for the improvements but I wouldn't really know what changed under the surface. On Fri, Mar 15, 2013, James Alexander <[email protected]> wrote: > > Aye, I know for example that our page views have more then doubled in the > last 5 years (since 2008) and I believe grew even more dramatically in the > years before that. They increased a lot, but I don't think they more than doubled, or even doubled[2]. The rise is pretty steady from Feb 09. Regards Theo [1]http://blog.wikimedia.org/c/technology/operations/outage/ [2] http://stats.wikimedia.org/reportcard/RC_2012_02_detailed.html#fragment-31 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
