Re: Livelihood statistics of the SKS keyserver network

[Kiss Gabor (Bitman)]

On Thu, 13 May 2021, Gunnar Wolf wrote:

Dear Gunnar,

> > Okay, but it would be useful if you could standardize the graphs somehow.
> > I.e. try to PLOT successful_connections per time_interval.
> 
> I don't know if I understood this correctly. As I said, I changed the
> polling frequency after a couple of months; I am sure this would skew
> the results.

I mistakenly thought the big drop on the graph in 2019 may be
derived from changing sampling method:

| Do note that at the beginning I sampled the network much more often
| (hourly). I decided this was too much, and since June 2019, am now
| walking the network only every four hours. I do hope nobody sees this
| as excessive!

| This shows the very large drop the SKS network had in mid-2019, as
| well as its behavior since then. I am happy, even hopeful, to note
| that it seems the network hit reliability minimums between October
| 2020 and February 2021, but it seems there is a slight trend for
| improvement, at least back to the late-2019 levels.

So I wanted to suggest two possible solutions:
* Simply delete intermediate data and keep just every fourth sample
  in the dense sampling era.
* Plot the ratio of the different results in percent instead of the
  absolute counts.

> My first plots had one column for each sample. What I'm doing now
> -precisely, in order to normalize the plot- is to "lump together" all
> of the plots for a given day into the same column. Thus, the generated
> plot respects and properly represents time (skipping a day here or
> there, as there might be some glitches in my data acquisition), but
> mostly in an uniform way.
> 
> (...or... Did I completely fail to understand you?)

No, it was me who misunderstood the graph.
I did not see by naked eyes that samples are denser on the left side
of the horizontal axis. I thought there is one sample per day and
you simply added the whole day numbers before plotting.

Cheers

Gabor