And also while we're at it, if there is a size "nearby" that has much better hit ratio and/or swift presence (150px maybe?).
Description
Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Resolved | • Pchelolo | T152163 Update RESTBase page summary endpoint to return canonical "image" info for each "thumbnail" | |||
Resolved | • Gilles | T152245 Investigate how well cached 60px and 120px thumbnails are |
Event Timeline
Found this breakdown of thumbnail sizes in swiftthat had been done some time ago: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T65440#1448815
120 is an excellent choice, it's the most common thumbnail size. 60px is quite low in the ranking but still in the top 50. 48px (3rd most used) would be a much better option, though, in that "area". There are roughly ten times more 48px thumbnails than 60px, which means a 48px request is 10 times more likely to be a hit than a 60px. If you need slightly bigger, 75px is your next best choice.
There isn't more to investigate, imho. I'd recommend you use either 48px or 75px instead of 60px to increase performance.
I've ran the numbers again today and the resulting json is P4577, it'll need a bit of json-love but it contains a breakdown by size of bytes and number of thumbnails
Updated P4577. Sorted using jq :-)
Top 10:
"2880": 11235128303234, "1920": 5447599279713, "1280": 5118964716716, "1024": 4100381810363, "2560": 3901237941485, "800": 3687993251192, "640": 2464623579198, "1200": 2202060461083, "1600": 1265417767891, "320": 800856360021,
"180": 35025828, "120": 34662399, "320": 27906299, "800": 26438144, "640": 26389242, "240": 23411309, "1024": 20756041, "1280": 18169359, "48": 15720077, "300": 14666507, "150": 13955179,