Oh that makes sense. page_title always, and page_id if you have it. I wonder if there's a way to get the canonical post-redirect page_title in all cases... hm...
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Andrew Otto aotto@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think if we do this right, we should prefer page_id, but use page_title if it is provided.
However, at the moment we don’t have a good way of actually getting page_title in Hadoop from the MW DBs even if given a page_id. We’d still have to infer the title from the URI. I’d prefer if page_id was the canonical way of identifying a page view, but currently page_title is used in all pageview statistics. Using the page_title as the generator of the request sees it might be even more correct than inferring it from the URI. Or, maybe it would be better (for the moment) to use use the existence of page_id or page_title to indicate to the pageview definition logic that this request is definitely already a pageview, and then use the same page title from URI logic on all requests no matter what.
page_id or page_title would just allow the pageview definition pattern matching logic to be skipped, as we would know right up front that a request is a pageview.
Are you saying the apps have the option to skip providing one of page_title or page_id?
So uhhh, yes! I think, although I am not the authority on this. I defer to other analytics engineers who will actually have to implement and maintain this change :)
On Aug 19, 2015, at 12:29, Bernd Sitzmann bernd@wikimedia.org wrote:
Andrew,
Are you saying the apps have the option to skip providing one of page_title or page_id? I hope this is the case since I just came up with a scheme where we could avoid the second request when a page has only a single section, which we already get through the first (lead) request.
Yes to what Oliver said: The apps don't always know the page_id ahead of time (only sometimes). The best example where we don't know the page_id ahead of time is when someone searches for a term on Google search on an Android device, and gets directed to our Android app. The app only gets the URL of the page, which we then take to derive the wiki and page_title from.
Bernd
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
It'll need to be, some requests don't know pageID in advance, which I think was the reason Apps initially didn't implement this.
On 19 August 2015 at 12:19, Andrew Otto aotto@wikimedia.org wrote:
If your app/site/etc. is creating a request that it wants to count as a pageview, add an X-Analytics header with pageview_id=<page_id> or pageview_title=<page_title>
page_id is the current key, so let’s keep that. page_title would be
good to
have too. Let’s make it an and/or.
On Aug 19, 2015, at 12:17, Bernd Sitzmann bernd@wikimedia.org wrote:
If your app/site/etc. is creating a request that it wants to count as a pageview, add an X-Analytics header with pageview_id=<page_id> or pageview_title=<page_title>
Ideally the page id would be the way to go. From a client's perspective
I
prefer the page title since clients don't always know the page id ahead
of
time. (We could put that header into the second request of loading the
page
but I cannot guarantee that we we will always have a second request in
the
future.)
--Cheers, Bernd
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Dan Andreescu <
dandreescu@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
This (making pageviews proactive) is a great idea, and we should follow through. Here's a simple start:
If your app/site/etc. is creating a request that it wants to count as a pageview, add an X-Analytics header with pageview_id=<page_id> or pageview_title=<page_title>
If we can make this change uniformly, I think we'd be in a very good place.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 19 August 2015 at 10:19, Andrew Otto aotto@wikimedia.org wrote:
> If we /do/ include RESTBase requests we will not only have to > rewrite the pageview definition for the apps to recognise the new
URL
> scheme
I really think that apps and APIs should do something proactive to
tag
or log a pageview. With more ways of viewing content, it is going
to get
harder and harder to maintain a pattern based definition. A
pageview should
be an event that is logged, not something that is pattern matched
out of a
very noisy stream of data.
Most mediawiki requests do this now, via the page_id field in the X-Analytlics header, but we can’t use this for all pageviews
because APIs
are more complicated (e.g. more than one page can be served in a
single
request, etc.). In the longterm, there should be a pageview event
stream
just like rcstream! :)
This is an excellent point. IIRC we'd been asking Apps to do this for kind of a while, so...
-Ao
> On Aug 18, 2015, at 19:58, Oliver Keyes okeyes@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> > On 18 August 2015 at 19:11, Bernd Sitzmann bernd@wikimedia.org > wrote: >> This discussion is about needed updates of the definition and >> Analytics >> implementation for mobile apps page view metrics. There is also an >> associated Phab task[4]. Please add the proper Analytics project >> there. >> >> Background / Changes >> >> As you probably remember, the Android app splits a page view into
two
>> requests: one for the lead section and metadata, plus another one
for
>> the >> remainder. >> >> The mobile apps are going to change the way they load pages in two >> different >> ways: >> >> We'll add a link preview when someone clicks on a link from a
page.
>> We're planning on switching over the using RESTBase for loading
pages
>> and >> also the link preview (initially just the Android beta, ater more) >> > > Woah woah woah woah woah. By RESTBase do you mean Gabriel's RESTful > service API? > > Last time I checked that wasn't even consumed by HDFS. Is it now
being
> consumed by HDFS? > > More importantly the actual URLs are going to look /totally/ > different. If we do not include RESTBase requests, we will miss the > apps. If we /do/ include RESTBase requests we will not only have to > rewrite the pageview definition for the apps to recognise the new
URL
> scheme, we will also potentially have to rewrite every /other/ bit
of
> the definition to /not/ incorporate those requests. > > (I use "we" in a collective sense. This isn't my baby any more, > although if Joseph et al want help with the refactor here I'm
happy to
> spend my volunteer time on it). > > But basically every other bit of your email is important but now > secondary: this is a potentially massive change, all on its own,
even
> without the link preview, even if the substance of the requests
going
> to RESTBase were identical. > >> This will have implications for the pageviews definition and how
we
>> count >> user engagement. >> >> The big question is >> >> Should we count link previews as a page view since it's an
indication
>> of >> user engagement? Or should there be a separate metric for link >> previews? >> >> Counting page views >> >> IIRC we currently count action=mobileview§ions=0 query
parameters
>> of >> api.php as a page view. When we publish link previews for all
Android
>> app >> users then we would either want to count also the calls to >> action=query&prop=extracts as a page view or add them to another >> metric. >> >> Once the apps use RESTBase the HTTPS requests will be very
different:
>> >> Page view: Instead of action=mobileview§ions=0 the app would
call
>> the >> RESTBase endpoint for lead request[1] instead of the PHP API >> mentioned >> above. Then it would call [2]. >> Link preview: Instead of action=query&prop=extracts it would call
the
>> lead >> request[1], too, since there is a lot of overlap. At least that
our
>> current >> plan. The advantage of that is that the client doesn't need to >> execute the >> lead request a second time if the user clicks on the link preview
(--
>> either >> through caching or app logic.) >> >> So, in the RESTBase case we either want to count the >> mobile-html-sections-lead requests or the >> mobile-html-sections-remaining >> requests depending on what our definition for page views actually
is.
>> We >> could also add a query parameter or extra HTTP header to one of
the
>> mobile-html-sections-lead requests if we need to distinguish
between
>> previews and page views. >> >> Both the current PHP API and the RESTBase based metrics would
need to
>> be >> compatible and be collected in parallel since we cannot control
when
>> users >> update their apps. >> >> [1] >> >>
https://en.wikipedia.org/api/rest_v1/page/mobile-html-sections-lead/Dilbert
>> [2] >> >>
https://en.wikipedia.org/api/rest_v1/page/mobile-html-sections-remaining/Dil...
>> [3] >> >>
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/Team/RESTBase_services_for_app...
>> >> [4] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T109383 >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Bernd >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> > > > > -- > Oliver Keyes > Count Logula > 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 Count Logula 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
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 Count Logula 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
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics