Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
2,088
edits
User:Sspitzer/GlobalFrecency: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
3) Upon first run, I have to add the frecency column to the moz_places table, create an index for that column, and make sure that livemark items and "place:" urls get a frecency of 0, and it should not appear in the ac results. Another way for a place to have a 0 frecency is if the url only has "embedded" visits. | 3) Upon first run, I have to add the frecency column to the moz_places table, create an index for that column, and make sure that livemark items and "place:" urls get a frecency of 0, and it should not appear in the ac results. Another way for a place to have a 0 frecency is if the url only has "embedded" visits. | ||
5) If I don't know the | 5) If I don't know the frecency of a place, the value is -1. This is what I call an "invalid" frecency. If something has an invalid frecency, it will show up in the ac results. | ||
6) the url bar drop down shows "typed" sites, ordered by frecency descending. | 6) the url bar drop down shows "typed" sites, ordered by frecency descending. | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
7) When inserting a bookmark, we attempt to calculate a frecency for it. This will impact the performance of bookmark import and also fx 2 - > fx 3 migration. (spin off bug coming about how to deal with it.) | 7) When inserting a bookmark, we attempt to calculate a frecency for it. This will impact the performance of bookmark import and also fx 2 - > fx 3 migration. (spin off bug coming about how to deal with it.) | ||
8) for how we calculate a | 8) for how we calculate a frecency for a site, see http://wiki.mozilla.org/User:Mconnor/PlacesFrecency (and option 3). I use the 10 most recent visits, and this is pref controlled, as all are the buckets, weights and bonus values. | ||
9) if we don't have any visits for a site, I make an attempt to estimate the frecency. more on this in a spin off bug (including when we should estimate and when we should not.) | 9) if we don't have any visits for a site, I make an attempt to estimate the frecency. more on this in a spin off bug (including when we should estimate and when we should not.) | ||
| Line 114: | Line 114: | ||
5) | 5) | ||
issue: if when | issue: if when autocompleting, we will prefer moz_place title over bookmark title, and so when showing match, we will show that one. because of the fix for bug #407292 – When adding a bookmark with no title, we should use the uri as the title, you might get the uri as the title if it matches the user text, as we prefer it. | ||
6) | 6) | ||
| Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
21) | 21) | ||
for the ac queries, sort by | for the ac queries, sort by frecency, then typed, then visit_count because we might not have frecency. in the case of 3b2 migration or clear all private data, lots of places have frecency = -1 (until idle), so we will have lots of frecency ties, so use typed and visit_count to break the ties and provide better results. | ||
22) | 22) | ||
| Line 226: | Line 226: | ||
25) | 25) | ||
improved | improved mDBOldFrecency query, explain why to dietrich | ||
26) | 26) | ||
| Line 266: | Line 266: | ||
29) would like to order autocomplete by frecency DESC, typed DESC visit_count DESC to break ties, but this is slow, even with an index. (spin off bug) | 29) would like to order autocomplete by frecency DESC, typed DESC visit_count DESC to break ties, but this is slow, even with an index. (spin off bug) | ||
30) | 30) comment about why we add typed bonus to bookmark bonus for frecency of | ||
// not the same logic above, as a single visit could not both | // not the same logic above, as a single visit could not both | ||
| Line 319: | Line 319: | ||
x) | x) | ||
for calc | for calc frecency, never calc 0 unless place: or unvisit livemark item, so do 1. | ||
x) | x) | ||
| Line 335: | Line 335: | ||
x) | x) | ||
when calc | when calc frecency, never calc 0 unless place: or unvisit livemark item, so do 1. | ||
x) | x) | ||
| Line 372: | Line 372: | ||
2 -> 3 migration, frecency = -1, but do we have visit counts? force place: and unvisited livemarks to be zero, do one on idle, wait for rest? | 2 -> 3 migration, frecency = -1, but do we have visit counts? force place: and unvisited livemarks to be zero, do one on idle, wait for rest? | ||
3b2 - > 3 | 3b2 - > 3 migration, frecency = -1, but we do have visit counts. force place: and unvisited livemarks to be zero, do on idle, wait for rest. | ||
clear all private data, frecency = -1, but we do have visit counts. force place: and unvisited livemarks to be zero, do on idle, wait for rest. | clear all private data, frecency = -1, but we do have visit counts. force place: and unvisited livemarks to be zero, do on idle, wait for rest. | ||
small area: | small area: | ||
partial expiration, frecency = -1 for a few places, but we do have visit counts. don't think we need to force place and unvisited livemarks, (maybe we do for unvisit | partial expiration, frecency = -1 for a few places, but we do have visit counts. don't think we need to force place and unvisited livemarks, (maybe we do for unvisit livemarks) , do on idle, wait for rest. | ||
small, but could be big: | small, but could be big: | ||