Forum: NGINX split users

0f7a1240e82f744c6c607fa7081b99f7?d=identicon&s=25 Igor Sysoev (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 16:36
(Received via mailing list)
Hi,
I'm developing a module for A/B split testing.
The splitting is defined as:

users_split "${remote_addr}AAA"   $variant {
            0.5%                  one;
            2.0%                  two;
            -                     "";
}

The question is: what is the better English name:
users_split
user_split
clients_split
client_split
or something else ?


--
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/
317edb9eca1c44b3507de8209f3b968f?d=identicon&s=25 邵军辉 (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 17:03
(Received via mailing list)
How about with_split?

:-D
56080a668b706e94fb2bbe9ee727d006?d=identicon&s=25 Reinis Rozitis (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 17:14
(Received via mailing list)
'distribute' ?

rr


----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Sysoev" <igor@sysoev.ru>
To: <nginx@nginx.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 5:35 PM
Subject: split users
61d4fa1ae5cd5b1cc7ccf1298c4d422b?d=identicon&s=25 Piotr Sikora (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 17:18
(Received via mailing list)
Hello Igor,

> The question is: what is the better English name:
> users_split
> user_split
> clients_split
> client_split
> or something else ?

I would go with "split_clients", but "clients_split" seems acceptable if
you
want to keep it within "clients_" namespace.

Best regards,
Piotr Sikora < piotr.sikora@frickle.com >
D88fc8cfcc2834c925324254770f7f59?d=identicon&s=25 Peter Portante (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 18:38
(Received via mailing list)
How a_b_split?

-peter
0f7a1240e82f744c6c607fa7081b99f7?d=identicon&s=25 Igor Sysoev (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 18:44
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:36:40PM -0400, Peter Portante wrote:

> How a_b_split?

I got to learn the "A/B split" term a couple of hours ago :)
I do not think that it will be good name.

> > To: <nginx@nginx.org>
> >>           -                     "";
> >> _______________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx@nginx.org
> http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx

--
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/
Faf497d2b65e90e9965db852589a768d?d=identicon&s=25 Phillip Oldham (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 19:01
(Received via mailing list)
On 12/05/2010 15:35, Igor Sysoev wrote:
> The question is: what is the better English name:
> users_split
> user_split
> clients_split
> client_split
> or something else ?
>

distribute_requests
dist_requests
split_requests
request_split

--

*Phillip B Oldham*
ActivityHQ
phill@activityhq.com <mailto:phill@theactivitypeople.co.uk>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Policies*

This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named
recipient(s) only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in
error, please reply to this e-mail and highlight the error. No action
should be taken regarding content, nor must you copy or show them to
anyone.

This e-mail has been created in the knowledge that Internet e-mail is
not a 100% secure communications medium, and we have taken steps to
ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus. We must
advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should
ensure they are completely virus free, and that you understand and
observe the lack of security when e-mailing us.
A8108a0961c6087c43cda32c8616dcba?d=identicon&s=25 Maxim Dounin (Guest)
on 2010-05-12 20:31
(Received via mailing list)
Hello!

On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 06:35:43PM +0400, Igor Sysoev wrote:

> The question is: what is the better English name:
> users_split
> user_split
> clients_split
> client_split
> or something else ?

Maybe something like "map_split"?  I believe it's really similar
to map module, and the only difference is mapping algorithm.

Maxim Dounin
52c60241e2c149163ce4101e6a153205?d=identicon&s=25 Ken (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 08:45
(Received via mailing list)
How about with_split?

or just split
0f7a1240e82f744c6c607fa7081b99f7?d=identicon&s=25 Igor Sysoev (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 10:56
(Received via mailing list)
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 09:03:56AM +0800, Ken wrote:

> How about with_split?
>
> or just split

"split" is too good name for this. I reserve it for something else.

> > }
> > Igor Sysoev
> > http://sysoev.ru/en/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > nginx mailing list
> > nginx@nginx.org
> > http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx
> >

> _______________________________________________
> nginx mailing list
> nginx@nginx.org
> http://nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx


--
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/
B9aa48577a4934dd46251413485ebac7?d=identicon&s=25 Luca De Marinis (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 11:02
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Phillip Oldham <phill@activityhq.com>
wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 15:35, Igor Sysoev wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>> I'm developing a module for A/B split testing.

> split_requests

+1
0f7a1240e82f744c6c607fa7081b99f7?d=identicon&s=25 Igor Sysoev (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 13:47
(Received via mailing list)
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 06:00:59PM +0100, Phillip Oldham wrote:

> >
> split_requests
> request_split

I still considering two initial varaints: user_split or users_split.
Does "users_split" sound good or not for English ear ?


--
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/
0ca8b451de10ca1662c439ca9c82d543?d=identicon&s=25 jiang nan (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 13:59
(Received via mailing list)
“users_split” is better


2010/5/13 Igor Sysoev <igor@sysoev.ru>
Faf497d2b65e90e9965db852589a768d?d=identicon&s=25 Phillip Oldham (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 16:13
(Received via mailing list)
On 13/05/2010 12:47, Igor Sysoev wrote:
>>>
>>>
>> distribute_requests
>> dist_requests
>> split_requests
>> request_split
>>
> I still considering two initial varaints: user_split or users_split.
> Does "users_split" sound good or not for English ear ?
>

I believe "client_split" would be better english rather than
"user_split"; when seeing "user" one would think of a system user,
whereas "client" is preferrable as something which connects to a system
(in this case a webserver).

"split_clients" would be even better - this dictates the block's
*intention* rather than what it "is", which would to mind easier when
writing the block. Other things could be "split_" also, in future
modules: "split_backends" for example.

--

*Phillip B Oldham*
ActivityHQ
phill@activityhq.com <mailto:phill@theactivitypeople.co.uk>

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Policies*

This e-mail and its attachments are intended for the above named
recipient(s) only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in
error, please reply to this e-mail and highlight the error. No action
should be taken regarding content, nor must you copy or show them to
anyone.

This e-mail has been created in the knowledge that Internet e-mail is
not a 100% secure communications medium, and we have taken steps to
ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any virus. We must
advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should
ensure they are completely virus free, and that you understand and
observe the lack of security when e-mailing us.
0f7a1240e82f744c6c607fa7081b99f7?d=identicon&s=25 Igor Sysoev (Guest)
on 2010-05-13 16:21
(Received via mailing list)
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 03:11:52PM +0100, Phillip Oldham wrote:

> >>> or something else ?
>
> I believe "client_split" would be better english rather than
> "user_split"; when seeing "user" one would think of a system user,
> whereas "client" is preferrable as something which connects to a system
> (in this case a webserver).
>
> "split_clients" would be even better - this dictates the block's
> *intention* rather than what it "is", which would to mind easier when
> writing the block. Other things could be "split_" also, in future
> modules: "split_backends" for example.

Thank you. I will use split_clients.


--
Igor Sysoev
http://sysoev.ru/en/
Please log in before posting. Registration is free and takes only a minute.
Existing account

NEW: Do you have a Google/GoogleMail, Yahoo or Facebook account? No registration required!
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account | Log in with Facebook account
No account? Register here.