Re: H2 Server Push performance data

Hi Aman,

Interesting results, thanks for sharing! I do wonder why you decided to
compare means instead of percentiles? It looks like there are some crazy
bad outliers. Assuming your "April 2019 Results with Old Methodology" and
"April 2019 Results (1% quantile excluded)" graphs use the same set of
sites in the same order, the mean goes from about +500ms to -200ms. If 99%
of requests on that site take -200ms, the last 1% must take 70s! Instead of
means, you could have compared medians, or 25th/75th percentiles, or other
percentiles in the distribution. You can compute confidence intervals on
percentiles. You can also do something like Mann-Whitney to check if the
distributions differ significantly.

I'd also like to hear more about this linear regression that you run on the
A/B results. I couldn't follow why this regression is necessary. If your
A/B test uses i.i.d. coin flips, you can compute confidence intervals
directly on the A/B results. Is your A/B test not i.i.d.? How do you know
the linear regression doesn't introduce bias?

Also, have you looked into measuring other metrics, such as
FirstContentfulPaint?

-Tom

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 4:41 AM Nanner, Aman <ananner@akamai.com> wrote:

> At the previous IETF 102 HTTPWG session in Montreal, I had presented some
> Akamai data on H2 Server Push which can be found here:
>
>
> https://github.com/httpwg/wg-materials/blob/gh-pages/ietf102/akamai-server-push.pdf
>
> Akamai has conducted some more recent tests with a tweaked methodology
> (exclusion of 1% highest-latency requests on the long-tail), and we have
> found some interesting results. I share some more details about the
> performance analysis here:
>
>
> https://medium.com/@ananner/http-2-server-push-performance-a-further-akamai-case-study-7a17573a3317
>
> Thanks,
> Aman Nanner
> Akamai Technologies Inc.
>
>