Thank you very much for your detailed reply.
We tried to convince our friend with your message and WP:PERF but he's
still not convinced, he even created a RfC on frwiki which is currently
being discussed and we need some more information.
He created these two pages:
* <https://fr.wikipedia.org/?oldid=177832893&uselang=en> (list of
* <https://fr.wikipedia.org/?oldid=177847552&uselang=en> (list of direct
Previewed them and argue that the parser profiling data table shown
below the page indicate that there's less CPU time/real time usage with
the page using direct links than the one using redirects:
"As surprising as it may seem, the page that gives the best result is
the one with the direct links. Exactly the opposite of those who want to
prohibit the fixes [note: we don't], it is precisely the direct links
that give the best results. Go figure."
Does that kind of benchmark makes sense? Is the parser profiler data
even relevant here? What exactly is calculated?
Sorry for all these questions but we would be grateful if you could shed
some light on this.
On 24.11.2020 05:36, AntiCompositeNumber wrote:
> While the specifics may have changed over time, the general point of
> the page is correct -- "fixing" a redirect will use significantly more
> server time than clicking on one. When you click a redirect, MediaWiki
> queries the redirect table to see where you should go instead. Reads
> from the database like this are fast. However, when you edit the page
> to "fix" a redirect, MediaWiki has to save the edit, update the links
> tables, re-render the HTML, invalidate the cache, and serve the new
> HTML, among other things.
> From a reader's perspective, there's no performance difference between
> clicking a redirect and clicking any other internal link. We're
> talking milliseconds here, if that. If you wanted to really improve
> the performance of a page, remove all the images. (Note: do not do
> This falls under
> let the developers and the operations folk worry about performance. If
> you're already making an edit to an article and you feel like
> bypassing a few redirects, go ahead and knock yourself out. But going
> out of your way to "fix" links to redirects is just a waste of your
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:23 PM Andreas Papacharalampous <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> the page was created in 2006 , but i don't think it's up to date for 2020. the last couple of "constructive" edits were from 2006-2011 but i'm not sure.
>> : https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation%20popups/About%20fixing%20redirects
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 11:11 PM Thibaut Payet <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> On the French Wikipedia we're currently reworking our help page about
>>> redirects and some of us would like to include a section about common
>>> misconceptions, especially those described at
>>> However one user who's used to "fix" redirects is strongly opposed
>>> because "this page is from 2006" and it's "unsourced".
>>> So I would like to ask the sysadmins from Wikimedia and the MediaWiki
>>> developers who are following this mailing list: is this page created in
>>> 2006 still true and relevant in 2020?
>>> Thank you.
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Thibaut Payet
>>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l mailing list