have IPv6 *and* SSL on a virtual IP?
Thanks!
--
Happy holidays, tav
plex:espians/tav | t...@espians.com | +44 (0) 7809 569 369
http://tav.espians.com | http://twitter.com/tav | skype:tavespian
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group
And, whilst I'm at it, could we have more info on SSL on VIP?
Does it scale as traffic increases, i.e. do more IPs get allocated?
Does it get re-assigned if an App Engine datacenter goes down?
Thanks again!
--
All the best, tav
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 5:16 AM, tav t...@espians.com wrote:
I
Sadly, yes.
On Jun 23, 5:24 am, renderpaz kev...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone else seeing 5+ min wait deploying python apps?
Kevin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To post to this group, send email to
to know how you guys do it — thanks!
--
love, tav
plex:espians/tav | t...@espians.com | +44 (0) 7809 569 369
http://tav.espians.com | http://twitter.com/tav | skype:tavespian
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
is indexed, the key defined in its
__index__ property will be used in place of its own key when the
indexes are constructed...
Of course these special related entities would still be accessible
by using their key names...
Hope that makes sense.
--
love, tav
plex:espians/tav | t...@espians.com
that landed yesterday in 1.2.4?
--
love, tav
plex:espians/tav | t...@espians.com | +44 (0) 7809 569 369
http://tav.espians.com | http://twitter.com/tav | skype:tavespian
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
(send='tav', body='Hello World')
msg_key = msg.key()
And the following related MessageIndex entities:
rcv1 = MessageIndex(parent=msg_key, receivers=['alice', 'bob'],
__index__=msg_key)
rcv2 = MessageIndex(parent=msg_key, receivers=['ryan'], __index__=msg_key)
The presence of the newly
, the disadvantage is that for (unknown) periods of time, there
would be duplicate data sets for a given User... All of which is
caused by the fact that the datastore calls cannot exceed 1MB. =(
So queries will yield duplicate data -- gah!!
Is there a better approach to try at all? Thanks!
--
love, tav