Is this good to go? On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Adam Baso <[email protected]> wrote:
> I posted the query results at > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T104942#1458981. I _believe_ there > wasn't significant skew on particular days that would taint the initially > reported number, although there were small variations as expected. > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Adam Baso <[email protected]> wrote: > >> No problem, I'll run some extra queries. >> >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:04 AM, John <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 1 day isnt much to base a decision on, especially on a global level. >>> Normally I would use a sample set of at least a week, to a month of >>> values. >>> Sorry if I seem like im being a pain, I have just seen a lot of bad >>> choices >>> made based off limited data sets. With a wider data set we might find >>> that >>> Tuesdays are the slowest day for traffic, or some other factor that skews >>> the data. Ensuring data validation is important when making these types >>> of >>> calls based off the working dataset. >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Toby Negrin <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Hi John -- >>> > >>> > What do you think would be a better sample? My feeling is that a 24 >>> hour >>> > period captures global usage and we're currently at about .01% of page >>> > views come to these domains is a pretty good indicator. Keep in mind >>> we're >>> > doing this for a legitimate technical reason and not arbitrarily. >>> Looking >>> > at the UAs is a good idea and we will do that. >>> > >>> > thanks, >>> > >>> > -Toby >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:55 AM, John <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > > Can we look at a wider sample? using a single day as judgement >>> factor is >>> > a >>> > > bad idea. However if the data supports your position I dont see any >>> > serious >>> > > problems. You might want to take a look at either the UA's or >>> refering >>> > > sources to see if there is a primary source for the traffic and >>> mitigate >>> > > that. >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Adam Baso <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > Looks like the user pageviews for wap.wikipedia.org and >>> > > > mobile.wikipedia.org >>> > > > subdomains are approximately 0.02% of the size of pageviews for >>> > > > m.wikipedia.org subdomains based on a recent one day check. >>> > > > >>> > > > hive> select count(*) from >>> > > > wmf.webrequest where >>> > > > year = 2015 and month = 7 and day = 14 >>> > > > and access_method = 'mobile web' >>> > > > and (uri_host like '%.wap.wikipedia.org' OR uri_host like '%. >>> > > > mobile.wikipedia.org') >>> > > > and is_pageview = true and agent_type = 'user'; >>> > > > >>> > > > 35,543 >>> > > > >>> > > > hive> select count(*) from >>> > > > wmf.webrequest where >>> > > > year = 2015 and month = 7 and day = 14 >>> > > > and access_method = 'mobile web' >>> > > > and uri_host like '%.m.wikipedia.org' >>> > > > and is_pageview = true and agent_type = 'user'; >>> > > > >>> > > > 202,024,891 >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:41 AM, John <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > ... Have we done any analysis on usage of those subdomains? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Adam Baso <[email protected]> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > There's a ticket for removing mobile.wikipedia.org and >>> > > > wap.wikipedia.org >>> > > > > > domains/subdomains, which are legacy domain names superceded by >>> > > > > > m.wikipedia.org and its subdomains. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T104942 >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > The rationale for the removal of these legacy domain names is >>> to >>> > help >>> > > > > > support HSTS preloading in browsers with the existing TLS SAN >>> cert. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > After review of the ticket, can anyone think of a compelling >>> reason >>> > > to >>> > > > > keep >>> > > > > > those old domain names? >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I'm going to open a separate thread on mobile-l about this >>> given >>> > this >>> > > > is >>> > > > > > more mobile-targeted, yet some people only operate on one of >>> > > wikitech-l >>> > > > > or >>> > > > > > mobile-l. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > -Adam >>> > > > > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list >>> > > > > > [email protected] >>> > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> > > > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > > > Wikitech-l mailing list >>> > > > > [email protected] >>> > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> > > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > > Wikitech-l mailing list >>> > > > [email protected] >>> > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> > > > >>> > > _______________________________________________ >>> > > Wikitech-l mailing list >>> > > [email protected] >>> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> > > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Wikitech-l mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikitech-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
