History | Log In     View a printable version of the current page.  
Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: OX-3095
Type: New Feature New Feature
Status: Closed Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: Critical Critical
Assignee: Matteo Beccati
Reporter: Arlen Coupland
Votes: 8
Watchers: 3

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
OpenX Ad Server

Allow for zone probability to be distributed amongst Campaigns, independent of # of banners

Created: 29/May/08 11:32 AM   Updated: 22/May/09 10:50 PM
Component/s: OXP: Maintenance Engine
Affects Version/s: OXP 2.7.4-dev, OpenX 2.5.70-beta, OpenX 2.7.8-dev
Fix Version/s: Milestone 30, OpenX 2.8.1
Security Level: Public (All users can see these issues)

Time Tracking:
Original Estimate: 40h
Original Estimate - 40h
Remaining Estimate: 0h
Time Spent - 4h
Time Spent: 4h
Time Spent - 4h Time Not Required

Issue Links:

 Description  « Hide
A very popular request is to allow 2.4+ to provide probability within a zone based on campaigns rather than banners, as it was possible in 2.0.

What this means is that if you have 2 campaigns assigned to a zone, you could edit weights so that campaignA always has 25% probability while campaignB will always have 75% probability, ignoring the # of banners assigned to the zone

A workaround guide has been created and is one of the more popular explanations given on the forum

 All   Comments   Work Log   Change History   FishEye   Crucible   Builds      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Matteo Beccati - 29/May/08 11:54 AM
The change was willingly made and it's one of the bigger differences between 2.0 and 2.4. In 2.0 campaigns with same weight had the same probability to be displayed. In 2.4, it depends on the number of banners.

Scott Neader - 22/Jul/08 05:40 PM
I am sorry, but I am completely lost on the logic of this change. People purchase advertising CAMPAIGNS... if they want to have 1 or 20 banners running during this campaign, it should not matter.

Now I need help with this: A customer has 2 banners in his campaign, one "Activated" and one "Deactivated". If he logs in and "Activates" the other banner, now he gets DOUBLE the exposure, for no extra money.

Sigh... now I have had to log in and edit all 150 of my advertiser's profiles, to remove the ability for them to Activate and Deactivate banners... I can no longer let my advertisers control which of their banners are running.

I have been a long time PAN/OX user, but now I feel like I have to go searching for a different product. I just don't understand the change I guess, and what the benefit is.

Thanks for listening.

  • Scott

Dan dhc - 24/Jul/08 11:51 PM
I wholeheartedly AGREE with Scott!

This is ludicrous. PAN did exactly what needed to be done - was logical - and performed by default CORRECTLY.

Now, OX altered the logic of the calculations/priority - and rendered it impossible to accomplish REAL-WORLD application of OX to a large number of advertisers and campaigns - AND - they have the audacity to call THIS a "change" ?!?

Google now has a free alternative. Appears it is time to give it a MUCH closer look.

Too bad.

Nuno - 29/Jul/08 04:54 PM
I also totally agree with Scott. That is the only logical way to do it for me. Without it I cannot give access to my advertisers to manage their own banners. In fact if a advertiser changes the weight of his banner to 9999 he would get all the impressions...

The way it is implemented: probabiliyy = overallweight / weight_campaign x weight_banner

Campaign 1 weight: 75
– Banner C1 weight: 1
Campaign 2 weight: 25
– Banner 1C2 weight: 1
– Banner 2C2 weight: 2

– Banner C1 prob.: 50%
– Banner 1C2 prob.: 16.67%
– Banner 2C2 prob.: 33.33%

whereas it shoud be: probability = overall weight/ weight_campaign; probability_banner_inside_campaign = overall_weight_banners / specific_banner_weight

And the result should be:
– Banner C1 prob.: 75%
– Banner 1C2 prob.: 8.33%
– Banner 2C2 prob.: 16.67%

--> Banner 1C2 prob + Banner 2C2 prob = 25%

Jack Muramatsu - 30/Jul/08 07:09 PM
I agree with Scott. I have the very same situation. The change in Zone Probability made in 2.4 is the sole reason I have not upgraded. I don't understand the real world logic of the current implementation. I would very much like to see zone probability calculated as it was pre-2.4 or have a switch/option for that.

Kor Wei Kang - 06/Aug/08 04:57 AM
I agree with Scott too. The logic should work at that way.

Jeff Kufalk - 23/Sep/08 01:46 PM
As well, I agree with Scott.

I have nothing special to add in the line of comments other than stating how crucial this is to the package.

Manually manipulating a few advertisers is one thing, but on larger systems it's extremely complex. Not to mention it changes constantly as advertisers come on/off the platform.

I understand this to be a major fix, but wish to stress that this fix is IMHO required for this software to be usable at all, so leave the little fixes aside and dig into the fix that makes the package work.

In short, don't worry about the broken toe when the patient's heart has just stopped...

Kind thanks,


Nuno - 23/Oct/08 10:10 PM
This is actually the only reason why I find myself looking at other options like google ad manager, it is now a total nightmare if I have to ad a banner to one of my announcers. I seel my ad spaces based on % of appearance on site, with openx working like it is now i find myself having to walk daily with a pocket calculator and to change all of my inventary everytime an ad ends / is added.

Jeff Kufalk - 06/Jan/09 04:17 PM
Just checking to see if there is any new news on this...

Stephan Cunningham - 11/Apr/09 12:11 AM
We do have a resolution to bring this closer to the 2.0 functionality. We're working on a release plan for this now.

Joanna Mazgaj - 15/May/09 10:42 AM
Looking good in rc4. Closing.