Hi Sebastian, hi Roger, Sebastian reminded me yesterday that we should talk about Torperf at some point. You're right. There are a lot of open questions. Here are some of them:
- What shall we do with the Torperf run on ferrinii that fetches a 50 KiB file every minute and notes the path? I think Sebastian wanted this run to validate whether our assumption about Tor doing path selection is correct. Do you still want to do this? Shall I keep it running? - Do we want to keep the #1919 Torperf runs running or migrate them to some other VM (that has enough memory)? What do we expect to learn from keeping them running or migrating them that we didn't learn from the first week or two? Instead of keeping them running we could also make a PDF report and put it on metrics.tpo/papers.html. - Shall we "upgrade" the Torperfs on moria/torperf.tpo/siv to write their path to disk? Sebastian, did you finish the script to combine .data and .extradata files? And can you push your .extradata code to the main repository? While upgrading the Torperf scripts, should we also upgrade the Tor clients? Last time I checked, siv was running 0.2.1.24-dev, torperf was running 0.2.2.10-alpha-dev, and moria was running 0.2.2.8-alpha-dev. - What graphs do we want to put on the metrics website? Right now we have the daily median and interquartile range by file size and data source on metrics.tpo/performance.html. We could have a similar graph for all data sources, a graph with all individual data points instead of aggregates, the ECDFs for all sources and file sizes, and a graph on the number or fraction of failed/timed out runs. These new graphs would require us to add the raw Torperf measurements to the database and write procedures to make materialized views out of them. While doing so we should also add the path to the database schema. Anything we want to evaluate based on the path once it's in the database? Best, --Karsten
