Some information at https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/269334/how-many-active-users-contri...
TL;DR: not really, and definitely not StackOverflow alone (~14k). But perhaps the whole StackExchange has more than the English Wikipedia alone.
Nemo
+research
Fascinating. Thanks for sharing this, Nemo. And for setting those arrogant Stackers straight ;)
For anyone else interested: Nemo was able to answer this question because StackExchange has a Quarry http://quarry.wmflabs.org/-like public query interface of their own. You should go play with it right now: http://data.stackexchange.com/
Jonathan
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Some information at https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/269334/how-many-active-users-contri...
TL;DR: not really, and definitely not StackOverflow alone (~14k). But perhaps the whole StackExchange has more than the English Wikipedia alone.
Nemo
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
For anyone else interested: Nemo was able to answer this question because StackExchange has a Quarry http://quarry.wmflabs.org/-like public query interface of their own. You should go play with it right now: http://data.stackexchange.com/
It's worth pointing out one major difference between their Quarry-like thing and our Quarry. I love both, btw. But our Quarry suffers because the only public database we have is raw and has a schema meant for OLTP. StackExchange's is clearly hitting a well organized OLAP style schema. Something to aspire to, perhaps collaborate with them on.
It is worth pointing that our base database infrastracture is 35 times larger. Our (non duplicate) base data set is 10-15 times larger, compressed. And that we serve 30 times the number of database queries than they do; with peaks at 10-20x the number of queries per second, per server, despite his hardware being twice as powerful than our newest hardware.
All that with around 6-7 people working in infrastructure (vs 11 of us).
This doesn't have anything to do with the original post. I just wanted to a) agree with Dan that we need better analytics infrastructure (Re: Something to aspire to, perhaps collaborate with them on.) and b) explain why this hasn't been done already and why it is complex. But it is a known request both from analytics, research and other labs users.
Sources: http://stackexchange.com/performance https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:MySQL_at_Wikipedia.pdf http://stackexchange.com/about/team#Engineering
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Dan Andreescu dandreescu@wikimedia.org wrote:
For anyone else interested: Nemo was able to answer this question because
StackExchange has a Quarry http://quarry.wmflabs.org/-like public query interface of their own. You should go play with it right now: http://data.stackexchange.com/
It's worth pointing out one major difference between their Quarry-like thing and our Quarry. I love both, btw. But our Quarry suffers because the only public database we have is raw and has a schema meant for OLTP. StackExchange's is clearly hitting a well organized OLAP style schema. Something to aspire to, perhaps collaborate with them on.
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
Joel Spolsky explained his comparison - which was already mentioned on this list (Analytics-l) on September 17 - a bit more here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvEAuSHJOBU&t=2216 TLDL: it's indeed about the entire Stack Exchange network vs. the English Wikipedia (i.e. not about the number from Nemo's query), and they chose this metric for the closest possible comparison - but still maintain that posting a question or answer is a larger unit of work than the average WP edit.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Jonathan Morgan jmorgan@wikimedia.org wrote:
+research
Fascinating. Thanks for sharing this, Nemo. And for setting those arrogant Stackers straight ;)
For anyone else interested: Nemo was able to answer this question because StackExchange has a Quarry-like public query interface of their own. You should go play with it right now: http://data.stackexchange.com/
Jonathan
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Some information at https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/269334/how-many-active-users-contri...
TL;DR: not really, and definitely not StackOverflow alone (~14k). But perhaps the whole StackExchange has more than the English Wikipedia alone.
Nemo
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
-- Jonathan T. Morgan Senior Design Researcher Wikimedia Foundation User:Jmorgan (WMF)
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
StackOverflow's recent blog post about renaming their organisation does make an interesting claim though.
https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2015/09/were-changing-our-name-back-to-stack-...
The [Stack Exchange] network as a whole has more monthly 5-time posters
than English Wikipedia has 5-time monthly editors.
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Some information at https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/269334/how-many-active-users-contri...
TL;DR: not really, and definitely not StackOverflow alone (~14k). But perhaps the whole StackExchange has more than the English Wikipedia alone.
Nemo
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
Timo Tijhof, 14/11/2015 01:38:
StackOverflow's recent blog post about renaming their organisation does make an interesting claim though.
https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2015/09/were-changing-our-name-back-to-stack-...
The [Stack Exchange] network as a whole has more monthly 5-time
posters than English Wikipedia has 5-time monthly editors.
Yes, that's the explanation given in the question I linked: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/269344/248268 See there for open questions on how this number was calculated.
Nemo