Index ¦ Archives ¦ Atom ¦ RSS

Submission Date vs Activity Date

My comments on Bug 1422892 started to get long, so I started untangling my thoughts here.


From the bug:

We experimented with using activity_date instead of submission_date when developing the clients_daily etl job. We should summarize our findings and decide on which of these measures we'd like to standardize against in the future.

Summary of the problem

activity_date is generally preferable to submission_date because it's closer to what we actually want to measure. There's a delay between user activity and us receiving the data. :chutten has some great analysis[1] on the empirical difference between submission and activity dates, if you want to read more. 95% of pings are received within two days of the actual activity [2], but that means using submission_date "smears" data between today and yesterday (mostly).

However, submission_date is much easier to work with computationally. When we partition by submission_date, most jobs only need to process one day of data at a time. This makes it much easier to continuously update datasets and backfill missing data.

clients_daily is currently limited to 6 months of historical data because the entire dataset needs to be regenerated every day. This is inconvenient and causes real limitations when using the dataset [3]. The job takes between 90 and 120 minutes to run and currently finishes near 9:00 UTC. Adding more data to this job will push that completion time back, meaning the data will be unavailable for the first few working hours every day. Eew.

Solutions

I see three possible options:

  1. Standardize to submission_date
  2. Standardize to activity_date and try to mitigate the performance losses
  3. Allow both, but provide guidance for when to use each configuration

So far, the data engineering team has strongly recommended using submission_date. The difference between submission_date and activity_date has become even smaller with our team's work on ping sender [4]. Without a strong counter argument, I recommend continuing with submission_date.

If we do have a strong reason to continue keying datasets by activity_date, I recommend only using activity_date on "small" datasets. These are datasets built over a sample of our data, build over a rarer type of ping (e.g. not main pings), or heavily aggregated (e.g. to country-day). Someone should provide documentation on when activity_date is [un]necessary to be included in docs.tmo.


  1. https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/data-science-is-hard-client-delays-for-crash-pings/
  2. https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/two-days-or-how-long-until-the-data-is-in/
  3. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1414044
  4. https://chuttenblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/12/latency-improvements-or-yet-another-satisfying-graph/

© Ryan T. Harter. Built using Pelican. Theme by Giulio Fidente on github.