Opened 4 months ago

Closed 4 months ago

#28354 closed defect (wontfix)

Does the total consensus weight graph belong in the traffic section?

Reported by: teor Owned by: metrics-team
Priority: Medium Milestone:
Component: Metrics/Website Version:
Severity: Normal Keywords:
Cc: teor Actual Points:
Parent ID: #28328 Points:
Reviewer: Sponsor:

Description

It seems like consensus weight is more like traffic than servers:
https://metrics.torproject.org/totalcw.html

But it is totally up to you.

Child Tickets

Change History (4)

comment:1 Changed 4 months ago by karsten

Tough question!

It's difficult to draw a clear line between those two categories.

However, here's one argument against moving the total consensus weight graph to the traffic section: in the future we'll want to add more graphs that use consensus weight as metric rather than relay count: consensus weight by tor version, consensus weight by platform, etc. If we add those new graphs to the traffic section and remove their equivalents by relay count from the servers section, the servers section will soon be empty.

My suggestion is to put everything that uses bytes as metric into the traffic section and everything else into the servers section. Yes, I'm aware that consensus weights are based on measured traffic; but the purpose is to have a better weight for a relay than 1/n of all relays in the network.

Hmm.

comment:2 Changed 4 months ago by karsten

Status: newneeds_information

comment:3 Changed 4 months ago by irl

I would agree that this is really about the servers, not traffic. Consensus weight might indicate available bandwidth, but not bandwidth that was consumed.

comment:4 Changed 4 months ago by karsten

Resolution: wontfix
Status: needs_informationclosed

Alright. Leaving the graph where it is, because it seems to be the best place for now. Happy to reconsider later. Thanks for the suggestion anyway! Closing as wontfix.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.