- From: Ilya Grigorik <igrigorik@google.com>
- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:31:33 -0700
- To: "Reitbauer, Alois" <Alois.Reitbauer@compuware.com>
- Cc: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "Austin,Daniel" <daaustin@paypal-inc.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADXXVKpQ6A89A0_C4gHqgMmXJ_c06woGoSd1oCSPHJ50E13sDA@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Reitbauer, Alois < Alois.Reitbauer@compuware.com> wrote: > In the current example this is exactly what happens. I don't see the value > in saving this information and sending it later when the connection is up > again. For an operational issue like this live data is crucial. Having this > information after the fact is not valuable. > Perhaps that should read.. not *as* valuable? If my DNS server can't resolve your hostname, then there is no magic trick for somehow instantly reporting that to your server. I think, by definition, an error reporting mechanism would have to buffer certain class of errors, and report them later. Incidentally, defining how much to buffer, and when to beacon this data is a whole separate discussion. > This reminded my of a RUM discussion we had internally a while ago. The > main point was to allow loading JavaScript via HTTP headers and also define > expiration. Think of it as a cookie, but with a JavaScript file. The script > will then be executed after it is loaded. If it is set on a domain, it will > always be executed. > > Combining this approach with error logging would allow to immediately > alert in cases where the actual document cannot be loaded. The script – > with monitoring code – will be cached and executed although the page cannot > be loaded. The script extracts the error information and beacons it to a > monitoring infrastructure (obviously not your servers, which are down). > I'm not sure I follow. Are you literally saying "Header: <javascript here>"? Because if so, that seems like a very expensive way to do this. I think we should take a close look at CSP policy and error reporting mechanisms.. They've already shipped this, and there is a lot to be said for re-use of same mechanisms and concepts: - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/#content-security-policy-report-only-header-field - http://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/#sample-violation-report I'd prefer an automated solution, like CSP approach above, instead of a manual implementation (as described in the spec currently). ig
Received on Monday, 1 April 2013 00:32:42 UTC