Closed
Bug 1262921
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
Round out AppCache telemetry so we can make decisions around timing of its removal
Categories
(Toolkit :: Telemetry, defect)
Toolkit
Telemetry
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla49
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox49 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: miketaylr, Assigned: miketaylr)
References
Details
Attachments
(2 files, 3 obsolete files)
We have a few Telemetry probes related to AppCache: HTTP_OFFLINE_CACHE_DOCUMENT_LOAD: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/netwerk/protocol/http/nsHttpChannel.cpp#3710 We also have "USE_COUNTER2_DEPRECATED_AppCache_DOCUMENT" and "USE_COUNTER2_DEPRECATED_AppCache_PAGE": https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/toolkit/components/telemetry/histogram-whitelists.json#1013 There's also Bug 899521. We also want to measure AppCache API usage.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
Ehsan, what else do you think we need (apart from window.applicationCache API usage?)
Flags: needinfo?(ehsan)
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mike Taylor [:miketaylr] from comment #1) > Ehsan, what else do you think we need (apart from window.applicationCache > API usage?) Probing the individual API calls and also checks for the existence of applicationCache would be nice to have.
Flags: needinfo?(ehsan)
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
> checks for the existence of applicationCache would be nice to have. No idea how to do that part. Docs for adding use counter info: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/base/UseCounters.conf OK, looking into adding use counters for the API bits. I see we have: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/webidl/OfflineResourceList.webidl https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/interfaces/offline/nsIDOMOfflineResourceList.idl Just to verify (since I've never done UseCounter telemetry before), I want to be adding [UseCounter] annotations to OfflineResourceList.webidl and not the nsIDOMOfflineResourceList xpidl. Is this correct Nathan?
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mike Taylor [:miketaylr] from comment #3) > Docs for adding use counter info: > https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/base/UseCounters.conf > > OK, looking into adding use counters for the API bits. I see we have: > > https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/webidl/ > OfflineResourceList.webidl > https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/interfaces/offline/ > nsIDOMOfflineResourceList.idl > > Just to verify (since I've never done UseCounter telemetry before), I want > to be adding [UseCounter] annotations to OfflineResourceList.webidl and not > the nsIDOMOfflineResourceList xpidl. Is this correct Nathan? That's correct. You also need to add the appropriate lines to UseCounters.conf. I see that the large block comment doesn't make it clear that you need the [UseCounter] annotation and the UseCounters.conf modification; I'll file a bug on fixing that.
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → miket
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8749714 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. r=? Honza, would you mind reviewing? (to make sure I'm in the right place...)
Attachment #8749714 -
Flags: review?(odvarko)
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8749714 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. r=? Requesting approval to collect this telemetry to help us make decisions around removing AppCache.
Attachment #8749714 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Comment 9•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8749714 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. r=? Sorry, I am not qualified to do this review. I am member of the DevTools team and this is out of my scope. Honza
Attachment #8749714 -
Flags: review?(odvarko)
Comment 10•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8749714 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. r=? Review of attachment 8749714 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Probably meant for me. I assume we can't do this also for the event handlers? Those are probably going to be used a bit more than these methods.
Attachment #8749714 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•8 years ago
|
||
(welp, wrong Honza, my bad!)(In reply to Jan Honza Odvarko [:Honza] from comment #9) > Sorry, I am not qualified to do this review. I am member of the DevTools > team and this is out of my scope. Ooops. Sorry about that ^_^.
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Honza Bambas (:mayhemer) from comment #10) > I assume we can't do this also for the event handlers? Those are probably > going to be used a bit more than these methods. I think we can? They're attributes in the IDL, so we should be able to UseCounter them. ni? Nathan to double check before I update the patch.
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Comment 13•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Mike Taylor [:miketaylr] from comment #12) > (In reply to Honza Bambas (:mayhemer) from comment #10) > > I assume we can't do this also for the event handlers? Those are probably > > going to be used a bit more than these methods. > > I think we can? They're attributes in the IDL, so we should be able to > UseCounter them. > > ni? Nathan to double check before I update the patch. Hm, that's a good question. Attributes are indeed UseCounter-able, but things like addEventListener aren't going to go through the bindings layer where the use counters are incremented. So you could UseCounter the attributes, but I don't know that they're going to give you the data you want.
Flags: needinfo?(nfroyd)
Assignee | ||
Comment 14•8 years ago
|
||
OK, thanks Nathan and Honza. Let's land what we have right now, because it's better than nothing.
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•8 years ago
|
||
Updating commit message to reflect r=mayhemer. Carrying forward r+.
Attachment #8751350 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8749714 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8749714 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Assignee | ||
Comment 16•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8751350 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. Still need data collection approval before landing. bsmedberg?
Attachment #8751350 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Comment 17•8 years ago
|
||
If it's possible to add counters to the on* attributes, then I'd do it. It's still some information.
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•8 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8751354 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz)
Attachment #8751354 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8751354 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache event handlers. r?mayhemer Hang on, typo.
Attachment #8751354 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz)
Assignee | ||
Comment 20•8 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8751356 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz)
Attachment #8751356 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751354 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #8751354 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin)
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751356 -
Flags: review?(honzab.moz) → review+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751350 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin) → feedback+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751356 -
Flags: feedback?(benjamin) → feedback+
Assignee | ||
Comment 22•8 years ago
|
||
Updating commit message, carrying over r+.
Attachment #8751791 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751356 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8751350 [details] [diff] [review] Add UseCounter telemetry for AppCache API. Ah, need review from a DOM peer. Blake, would you mind?
Attachment #8751350 -
Flags: review?(mrbkap)
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751791 -
Flags: review?(mrbkap)
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751350 -
Flags: review?(mrbkap) → review+
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8751791 -
Flags: review?(mrbkap) → review+
Comment 25•8 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/7dd02104f1ed https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/5737e7172325
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•8 years ago
|
||
Green try run (w/o tests) just to prove this actually builds: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=ab191af9cd76
Comment 27•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/7dd02104f1ed https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/5737e7172325
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
status-firefox49:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla49
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•