My concern is going from 1% to 50% on stable - if something does go
wrong, that's a _lot_ of folks who will experience it. Are you open to
something smaller like 5%? If not, why not?
thx
On 2/29/24 12:34 AM, Zheda Chen wrote:
The volume of data on Beta is too low to draw any conclusion. Although
the experiment on 1% stable shows some promising result, the data are
not enough and we'd like to gather more data via experiment on higher
percentage of stable.
After that, based on large volume of data, we can draw the conclusion
and decide next step (whether to ship the feature).
I contribute the idea and CL source code of this feature, Francois
(fdoray@) is the main reviewer and the trial is planned by him. Let us
know if you have any concerns and we can discuss with fdoray@ together.
"Unimportant" frames means they are cross-origin, visible but use
non-large proportion (<75%) of page's visible area and have not
received a user gesture. All 3 conditions should be met.
On Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 10:26:22 AM UTC+8
[email protected] wrote:
Could you say more why you would like to experiment on 50% of
stable, vs requesting permission to ship? That's quite a leap from
1% - and it seems you already have results demonstrating
performance improvements.
Also, mind answering the question of specifying "unimportant frames"?
On 2/27/24 5:54 AM, Zheda Chen wrote:
fdoray@ launched this trial since Nov 2023, at first canary/dev,
and then beta, 1% stable. The experiments show statistically
improvements to CPU time on navigation, page load time and input
delay.
So we are requesting to experiment on 50% stable as next step.
Actually the feature should be in origin trial stage now. But I
don't have the permission to add origin trial stage. I have to
use dev trial instead. Need some help from webstatus-request@ to
grant me the permission.
On Tuesday, February 27, 2024 at 8:53:34 AM UTC+8
[email protected] wrote:
Hello,
To clarify: is this intended to be an I2E, or a Developer
Trial? According to
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5106220399853568, it appears
you are in the dev trial stage. But you mention stable
experiment below... so perhaps that's a process mistake?
Can you give more info on the experiment timelines and what
stable percentages you are requesting permission to
experiment on?
On 2/22/24 2:30 AM, Zheda Chen wrote:
Contact emails
[email protected], [email protected]
Specification
https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/timers-and-user-prompts.html
Summary
Align wake ups of JavaScript timers for unimportant
cross-origin frames. Currently, DOM timers <32ms are all
opt-out from AlignWakeUps [1] due to performance concerns.
This is very conservative and actually some unimportant
frames are eligible to use JS timer alignment. WebKit uses
the policy to align DOM timer of non-interacted cross origin
frames to 30ms. This feature adds JavaScript timer wake up
alignment for unimportant frames on foreground pages.
Unimportant frames means they are cross origin, visible but
have small proportion of page’s visible area, and have no
user interaction. [1]
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/4589092
Do you have plans to specify this concept of "unimportant
frames" somewhere?
Blink component
Blink>PerformanceAPIs>Timers
<https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EPerformanceAPIs%3ETimers>
TAG review
None
TAG review status
Not applicable
Risks
Interoperability and Compatibility
None
/Gecko/: No signal
/WebKit/: No signal
/Web developers/: No signals
/Other signals/:
WebView application risks
Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing
APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android
WebView-based applications?
None
Goals for experimentationWe plan to experiment on stable to
confirm whether we observe same performance improvement as
on lower channels and similar power benefit as in the lab.
We will decide whether this feature ships based on the
experiment data.
Ongoing technical constraints
None
Debuggability
None
Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms
(Windows, Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)?
Yes
Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests
<https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md>?
No
Flag name on chrome://flags
None
Finch feature name
ThrottleUnimportantFrameTimers
Requires code in //chrome?
False
Tracking bug
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40942028
Estimated milestones
DevTrial on desktop
122
DevTrial on Android
122
Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status
https://chromestatus.com/feature/5106220399853568
This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status
<https://chromestatus.com/>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/38855cfe-3bf3-4a04-b96a-81adaa5ba72fn%40chromium.org
<https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/38855cfe-3bf3-4a04-b96a-81adaa5ba72fn%40chromium.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/1996ccec-101e-4738-99d9-56855c8d33ec%40chromium.org.
