The Signpost

Technology report

Bugmeister to leave at end of May, but developers keen to "chart" a path ahead

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Jarry1250

Measuring site performance: charts, charts and more charts

A chart from the Signpost a fortnight ago generated by new performance charting tool Graphite (left). It demonstrated a worrying drop in the parser cache hit rate, now partially resolved (right).

Few people think of performance charts when asked what they consider the most exciting element of developing and maintaining MediaWiki wikis, but it was the area chosen by Performance Engineer Asher Feldman to be the subject of his latest post on the Wikimedia blog.

"To make targeted improvements and to identify both success and regression, we need data. Lots of data", Feldman wrote. And it certainly seems that the amount of performance-related data being collected is on the rise. Whereas previous systems "tended to mask performance issues that only surface on certain pages, or are periodic", a new system based on real-time graphing system Graphite allows thousands of data points to be tracked over time. Feldman continued, "We know we have major work ahead of us to improve performance pain points experienced by our community of editors, and [this kind of] data will guide the way".

Although not all the data collected is available to the public due to potential security concerns, a smaller set of public dashboards is now available from gdash.wikimedia.org, though certain reports will show an artificial daily drop until several imminent fixes go live. The new site complements existing pages available from high-level site status.wikimedia.org and the more detailed ganglia.wikimedia.org; those with appropriate privileges can take advantage of a detailed GUI to manipulate charts and create arbitrary new visualisations from the available data points.

Bugmeister Mark Hershberger leaves Wikimedia Foundation

Hershberger's last day will be at the end of May; as this code review backlog chart of a similar period earlier this year shows, a lot can still change before then.

Mark Hershberger will be leaving his job as Bugmeister at the Wikimedia Foundation at the end of May (wikitech-l mailing list). Hershberger had originally taken on the role as a temporary one (see Signpost coverage), but has now held it for over a year, investigating, commenting on and resolving dozens of bugs in that time. He was also influential in handling the development cycle, particularly dealing with the particularly intractable problem of slow code review.

The role gave Hershberger (and will give his successor) the opportunity to interact with dozens of different developers and Wikimedians in general, a role he appears to have mastered but which could prove the downfall of potential successors. Accordingly, public comments have been full of praise for the soon-to-be-outgoing Bugmeister, a "friendly, approachable, ... enthusiastic and cheerful" member of the Wikimedia staff, according to Director of Platform Engineering Rob Lanphier, who announced the departure. "We will miss you," wrote one developer, whilst another noted how Hershberger had turned his "uninteresting job into something actually motivating. No bug was too stupid to take care of and research". Asked for his own comment, the WMF's first Bugmeister said that of everything he had directed his energies towards during his time in the role, he was "very happy" with his work establishing full pre-deployment testing on a Wikimedia Labs-based imitation wiki—testing which resulted in several bugs in MediaWiki 1.19 being caught far earlier than they might otherwise have been.

The WMF plans to "start recruiting for a new Bugmeister soon". With such a broad area of responsibility, it could well be a tricky post to fill on a permanent basis by the time of Hershberger's actual departure at the end of May. Indeed, the hiring process will be set against an already difficult backdrop of a Git migration and wholesale changes to the Wikimedia deployment process.

In brief

Signpost poll
Diff colours
Vote now on next week's poll: Which of these best sums up your view about opening up Wikimedia authentication to third parties?


Not all fixes may have gone live to WMF sites at the time of writing; some may not be scheduled to go live for many weeks.

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.
  • Oh, come on, another performance tracking site? Of course, I applaud the initiative, but why can't these things be located in the same place? We now have stats., status., ganglia. and gdash. — to count only the ones I know of. Especially the last two are practically unguessable unless linked to. Why not integrating all this in a single portal, even if just a simple page linking to the different sites? It'd make it easier to keep track of these useful resources. --Waldir talk 14:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess they'll converge over time. Unless I'm missing something. - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 14:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that's a good point. I recommend posting something on Meta, or creating a thread on Wikitech-l. At least get the discussion started, and the idea out there.
    — V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 19:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not a regular on wikitech-l. Would you do that? --Waldir talk 13:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Me either, to be honest (lists are a PITA, if you ask me). Just post something on Meta. It'll be ignored I'm sure, but... there's always hope that someone will see it.
    — V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 02:22, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]



       

The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0