We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user follows, but not in timeline format.
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Alex Payne <a...@twitter.com> wrote:
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the > authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at > another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly > complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or > should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going > away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user > follows, but not in timeline format.
Alex Payne wrote: > We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the > authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at > another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly > complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or > should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going > away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user > follows, but not in timeline format.
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
-- ------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com -- If there was a hole, I would jump into it. -- Gackt Camui ------------------
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Alex Payne <a...@twitter.com> wrote:
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the > authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at > another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly > complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or > should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going > away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user > follows, but not in timeline format.
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our
> database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming
> weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers
> wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability.
> One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the
> "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if
> you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the
> authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at
> another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly
> complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or
> should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going
> away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user
> follows, but not in timeline format.
> One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
I always thought it was an odd, but interesting, feature. I can definitely imagine the performance hit though. Not worth keeping in my mind.
I do provide a link to the friends_timeline for other users within
Hahlo.
Over the last months the "friends_timeline" on Hahlo has been visited
about 280,000 times, of those around 60,000 were other peoples
timelines (ie. not the authenticating user's) I must say thats a
larger percentage that I expected.
IF you are going to remove it on the web, then I guess there's not a
problem removing it from the API too, so long as its communicated
appropriately to users. I personally don't have a huge problem with
it, but us developers will need to know if its going to be removed in
advance so that we can update our code accordingly.
Is this intended to be a permanent removal? Or temporary? (but not
"temporary" like paging). Seems a shame if the only solution to the
current issues is to remove functionality.
cheers
Dean
On May 25, 1:06 pm, Kee Hinckley <naz...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the
> > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if
> > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> I always thought it was an odd, but interesting, feature. I can
> definitely imagine the performance hit though. Not worth keeping in my
> mind.
> I do provide a link to the friends_timeline for other users within > Hahlo.
> Over the last months the "friends_timeline" on Hahlo has been visited > about 280,000 times, of those around 60,000 were other peoples > timelines (ie. not the authenticating user's) I must say thats a > larger percentage that I expected.
> IF you are going to remove it on the web, then I guess there's not a > problem removing it from the API too, so long as its communicated > appropriately to users. I personally don't have a huge problem with > it, but us developers will need to know if its going to be removed in > advance so that we can update our code accordingly.
> Is this intended to be a permanent removal? Or temporary? (but not > "temporary" like paging). Seems a shame if the only solution to the > current issues is to remove functionality.
> cheers
> Dean
> On May 25, 1:06 pm, Kee Hinckley <naz...@somewhere.com> wrote: >> On May 24, 2008, at 8:23 PM, Alex Payne wrote:
>> > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the >> > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if >> > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
>> I always thought it was an odd, but interesting, feature. I can >> definitely imagine the performance hit though. Not worth keeping in my >> mind.
> > I do provide a link to the friends_timeline for other users within
> > Hahlo.
> > Over the last months the "friends_timeline" on Hahlo has been visited
> > about 280,000 times, of those around 60,000 were other peoples
> > timelines (ie. not the authenticating user's) I must say thats a
> > larger percentage that I expected.
> > IF you are going to remove it on the web, then I guess there's not a
> > problem removing it from the API too, so long as its communicated
> > appropriately to users. I personally don't have a huge problem with
> > it, but us developers will need to know if its going to be removed in
> > advance so that we can update our code accordingly.
> > Is this intended to be a permanent removal? Or temporary? (but not
> > "temporary" like paging). Seems a shame if the only solution to the
> > current issues is to remove functionality.
> > cheers
> > Dean
> > On May 25, 1:06 pm, Kee Hinckley <naz...@somewhere.com> wrote:
> >> On May 24, 2008, at 8:23 PM, Alex Payne wrote:
> >> > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the
> >> > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if
> >> > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> >> I always thought it was an odd, but interesting, feature. I can
> >> definitely imagine the performance hit though. Not worth keeping in my
> >> mind.
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the > authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at > another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly > complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or > should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going > away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user > follows, but not in timeline format.
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our > database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming > weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers > wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability. > One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the > "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if > you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the > authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at > another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly > complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or > should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going > away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user > follows, but not in timeline format.
Amusingly, I just realized that I *was* using that form of the call. But I was using it as a temporary way of getting messages for a user without logging in--thus avoiding the rate limit. :-) It wouldn't get protected users, but I could fetch it more often, and then back off and use the authorized mechanism less frequently.
So yeah, you probably don't want to keep it around.
It seems that people are reluctant to give their username/password to
a web app. so I can see using
http://twitter.com/statuses/friends_timeline.xml as bit of a problem and it's not page-able.
I am using it heavily in some new interfaces I'm working on, so I
wouldn't mind keeping it... however if its removal meant a really
tangible improvement to Twitter's stability, I would vote to kill it.
> On May 24, 5:23 pm, "Alex Payne" <a...@twitter.com> wrote:
> We're looking to trim up a few parts of the Twitter that cause our
> database pain in an effort to maintain stability over the coming
> weeks. It's been often been said on this list that developers
> wouldn't mind suffering some API changes if it meant more reliability.
> One of the methods that hurts us the most is what we call the
> "profile with friends". Via the API, you'd access it via this URL if
> you wanted the timeline of updates by bob's friends:
> We'd still allow you to retrieve your friends_timeline for the
> authenticating user, just not the authenticating user looking at
> another user's timeline. This latter method forces us to do a fairly
> complex query that, when not cached, can be pretty painful.
> How many of you actually make use of this method? Should it stay or
> should it go? I can say that the equivalent view on the web is going
> away in all likelihood. You'll still be able to see who another user
> follows, but not in timeline format.
Socialthing.com does not use this feature, either, we only care about
the authenticated user and their friends. I can't see how we would
take advantage of that feature, either, so I vote to kill it,
especially if it is degrading performance so severely.
An update: we'll be deprecating the usage of this method that, apparently, hardly anyone but us uses. Most likely, the deploy that deprecates this will go out tomorrow, and the documentation will be updated at that time. URLs that specify an alternate user for whom to fetch a friends_timeline will continue to work, but will return statuses for the authenticating user.
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Joel Longtine <j...@socialthing.com> wrote:
> Socialthing.com does not use this feature, either, we only care about > the authenticated user and their friends. I can't see how we would > take advantage of that feature, either, so I vote to kill it, > especially if it is degrading performance so severely.
|
