Anyone against this? On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Adam Baso <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
