It seems to me like, if this were a problem, then Google isn't doing their job when it comes to scaling our applications. When I'm using Amazon's S3 or their SimpleDB (or, for the most part, EC2) I just have to think about "how much I pay for per GB used and per GB transferred". Amazon provides me almost no limitations on how much data I can store or how quickly I can access it, so why does Google? Is Amazon's ability to install more servers to handle increased load fundamentally greater than that of Google's? I wish less time was spent on quotas, even on features... even on /fixing bugs/ (and yes, even those which I consider to be blocking issues), and more time was spent on billing infrastructure so I could start paying them to scale in the way my application actually needs rather than in the ways they are willing to provide out of the kindness of their giant Google hearts for free. :( -J
-------------------------------------------------- From: "Barry Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 10:57 AM To: <google-appengine@googlegroups.com> Subject: [google-appengine] Re: quotas in appengine > Remember AppEngine is a 'shared' environment - lots of apps are all > using a slice of the same resources. > > Would you rather that someone (maliciously or simply though ignorance) > monopolizes all the resources (even if they are paying) and that > brings your app (though no fault of your own) to a standstill. ... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
