15:01:02 #startmeeting metrics team 15:01:02 Meeting started Thu Apr 13 15:01:02 2017 UTC. The chair is karsten. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:02 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 15:01:08 hi! 15:01:29 shorter meeting than usual today, because I screwed up coordinating this meeting with another one. 15:01:45 https://pad.riseup.net/p/3M7VyrTVgjlF <- agenda 15:02:03 I saw Samdney, hiro, and iwakeh. 15:02:09 hi everyone 15:02:26 hiro: want to start with the first topic? 15:02:30 - OnionPerf deployment (hiro) 15:02:32 sure 15:02:37 Hi hiro and karsten and all else! 15:02:38 cool! 15:02:41 hi iwakeh! 15:02:51 so it looks like measurements are finally consistent and we do not have timeouts 15:02:57 yay! 15:03:00 neat! 15:03:03 which is good 15:03:18 so last changes from rob worked pretty good 15:03:30 so what would be missing now is state of op-ab 15:03:56 I was chatting with irl end of last week and he was busy w something else, so I will try to catch up again on this maybe tomorrow or next week 15:04:03 also old tor-perf vm 15:04:22 old torperf vm? 15:04:24 talked with ln5 too and explained the setup, have to see how is that going on 15:04:29 ah, that's siv. 15:04:48 there's also a vm where we run a torperf instance called, ermm, torperf. 15:04:48 * Samdney Is back, some connecting problems today. 15:04:56 wb! 15:04:59 wb? 15:05:03 welcome back. 15:05:05 ahh neat 15:05:34 so I think that's all on op-side 15:05:35 so, still a few steps remaining to have all onionperf instances up and running, 15:05:45 but we have 3 by now, and they're working as expected. 15:05:47 right? 15:05:52 yes 15:06:12 ah, can you delete the 2017-04-10 files? 15:06:17 yep! 15:06:28 then I'll update collector tarballs. 15:06:32 thanks! 15:06:35 i think in the end we will have 5, but the last 2 will take a little bit longer 15:06:41 that's okay. 15:06:45 I'll delete right now 15:06:50 great! 15:06:55 okay, moving on? 15:07:25 ah, just one related thing: 15:07:42 given that we took longer to get onionperf running and remaining issues resolved, 15:08:01 I'm inclined to take the shortcut we discussed earlier and declare onion service measurements the new user model for sponsor X. 15:08:13 yes. 15:08:26 rather than including the more realistic website measurement. which we can still do, but which shouldn't block calling this deliverable done. 15:08:50 It is a new user-model. 15:08:56 yes, and it's useful. 15:09:01 true. 15:09:15 okay, great! moving on. 15:09:20 - In-memory stats and report (iwakeh) 15:09:53 the simulation was useful, 15:10:21 and we should be cautious adding noise too generously. 15:10:27 yep. 15:11:19 The amount of noise (or the standard deviation) 15:11:34 thereof increases by sqrt(r) 15:12:01 where r is the number of reports (i.e. extra-info descr) we sum up. 15:12:16 so, hmm, 15:12:29 that's bad for low count 15:12:40 should we look into alternative estimation methods that don't include r reports? 15:12:44 many or medium number of reports countries. 15:13:06 maybe something like we do for onion service stats where we use a trimmed mean? 15:13:17 in that way 15:13:22 so, r/2 reports. not a huge change, but potentially better. 15:13:25 twice as good!! 15:13:35 yes, this will need more work outside sponsorX. 15:14:03 perhaps. 15:14:13 what if we finish onionperf work and metrics-lib this month? 15:14:20 hmm, well rather averaging 15:14:21 for onionperf, see above. 15:14:27 metrics-lib is just a blog post away. 15:14:38 we would have two months for these stats. 15:14:46 it seems most relevant. 15:14:51 You're offline until 21.? 15:14:56 yep! 15:15:12 well, back on the 21st. 15:15:20 ok. 15:15:25 * Samdney is also interested in stats topics :) 15:15:34 should I focus on reviews? 15:15:52 Samdney: good point, we should share simulation results soon. 15:16:13 iwakeh: during this week? that would make sense, I think. 15:16:17 this is next topic (already) 15:16:21 yep. 15:16:25 Karsten what if it takes more time for irl and ln5 to integrate their machines? would that be still ok? 15:16:32 hiro: ah, yes. 15:16:42 hiro: we said we'd replace 3 torperf instances with 3 onionperf instances. 15:16:48 we have several deployments. 15:16:49 ah that's ok 15:17:00 we should still do the other 2, but we can call the deliverable done before that. 15:17:08 yep. 15:18:13 how about we put early simulation results on metrics-team@ today/tomorrow? 15:18:36 my fault to start that as private thread. 15:19:42 iwakeh: maybe you can respond to my latest comments, and I start a new thread on metrics-team@? 15:19:49 (comments via email) 15:20:15 sorry, just skimmed through that mail :-) 15:22:26 iwakeh: so, we have until end of june for sponsor x things. 15:22:35 yeah 15:22:46 I don't want to rush putting in noise only to find out later that we can't handle it. 15:22:59 but we could try to handle it over the next weeks, 15:23:03 Correct, that's why I suggest waiting 15:23:11 and either we figure out that we can, in which case we can put it in, 15:23:20 the patches can 15:23:27 or we figure out that we can't or are not sure yet, in which case we should hold that back. 15:23:32 already pave the way for easy introduction of 15:23:44 this noise, but we should not rush this now. 15:23:49 agreed. 15:24:04 the easy way out is to say we're not certain yet, and I believe we should keep that. 15:24:09 and, such a discussion and changes and simulations will 15:24:27 take way too much time from the core sponsor tasks. 15:24:55 but which remain? :) 15:25:05 I mean, certainly, the patches need to be written anyway. 15:25:23 anyway, I need to run in 4 minutes. 15:25:29 right :-) 15:25:33 no need to decide this today! 15:25:48 just saying that more work on stats is more important than more work on onionperf or metrics-lib. 15:26:01 true. 15:26:08 +1 15:26:15 - Tickets to review (karsten) 15:26:19 https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=needs_review&component=%5EMetrics%2FOnionoo&component=%5EMetrics%2Fmetrics-lib&component=%5EMetrics%2FCollecTor&component=%5EMetrics%2FMetrics+website&col=id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&col=component&order=priority 15:26:41 I didn't look which of these require review by me. 15:27:00 seems all on m list :-) 15:27:10 cool! :D 15:27:21 okay, good thing I'm out for a week and won't produce more tickets to review. 15:27:31 hehe 15:27:31 (thanks!) 15:27:36 - (No?) meeting next week, meeting time 1 hour earlier? (karsten) 15:27:46 two questions? 15:27:48 so, I won't be around next week. 15:28:00 I'd say let's skip next week. 15:28:04 for meetings. 15:28:07 fine by me 15:28:07 ok. 15:28:14 the second question is about the meeting time. 15:28:25 to avoid situations like today, it would be good to have future meetings 1 hour earlier. 15:28:31 30 minutes would work, too. 15:28:35 ok 15:28:44 30min 15:29:00 quick poll. 1h or 30min? 15:29:11 30min 15:29:16 30minn 15:29:21 -n 15:29:37 okay! 15:30:00 I'll announce the next meeting for 14:30 UTC in 2 weeks from now. 15:30:01 ok 15:30:05 great! 15:30:11 thanks, everyone! 15:30:36 if any other questions remain, I'm around until tomorrow evening via email. 15:30:42 bye! 15:30:44 bye, bye, and happy holidays. 15:30:45 bye! 15:30:45 bye! 15:30:49 :) 15:30:52 happy holidays :) 15:30:52 #endmeeting