But that's the point. I can not reach 30 active requests.
I can only reach 10 active requests without error.
Any ideas on how I can debug this?
Cheers, Gary.
On Mar 2, 7:05 am, "Nick Johnson (Google)" <nick.john...@google.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Wooble <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The 500 requests per second number relies on the probably-unreasonable
> > assumption that each request can complete in ~75ms. Deliberately
> > making your requests take a whole 3 seconds each is, obviously, not
> > going to work. You can only have 10 instances active at a time by
> > default; if the pages you're serving actually take 3 seconds to
> > complete you'll need to optimize things a whole lot or be stuck with a
> > 3.33 request/sec maximum.
>
> Actually, the default limit is 30 active requests.
>
> -Nick Johnson
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 1, 11:33 pm, Gary Orser <garyor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Nick,
>
> > > Hmm, I was running tests on a billing enabled appspot today. 100
> > > requests/test.
>
> > > 10 threads getting a URL with a 3 second sleep (to emulate
> > > computation) on appspot, was the most I could get without getting 500
> > > errors.
> > > If I raised the thread pool beyond 10, I started getting errors??
>
> > > That doesn't reconcile very well with this statement from the
> > > appengine website.
> > > "Requests
> > > The total number of requests to the app. The per-minute quotas for
> > > application with billing enabled allow for up to 500 requests per
> > > second--more than one billion requests per month. If your application
> > > requires even higher quotas than the "billing-enabled" values listed
> > > below, you can request an increase in these limits here.
> > > "
>
> > > Is there some billing setting that affects this?
>
> > > Cheers, Gary
>
> > > PS. dead simple request handler.
>
> > > import time
> > > from django import http
> > > def sit(req):
> > > time.sleep(3)
> > > return http.HttpResponse('foo')
>
> > > errors are:
>
> > > 03-01 04:15PM 48.177 /sit/91 500 10019ms 0cpu_ms 0kb gzip(gfe)
> > > 153.90.236.210 - - [01/Mar/2010:16:15:58 -0800] "GET /sit/91 HTTP/1.1"
> > > 500 0 - "gzip(gfe)" ".appspot.com"
> > > W 03-01 04:15PM 58.197
> > > Request was aborted after waiting too long to attempt to service your
> > > request. Most likely, this indicates that you have reached your
> > > simultaneous dynamic request limit. This is almost always due to
> > > excessively high latency in your app. Please seehttp://
> > code.google.com/appengine/docs/quotas.htmlfor more details.
>
> > > On Mar 1, 2:36 pm, Michael Wesner <mike.wes...@webfilings.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Correction/addition to my last email.
>
> > > > It turns out that our requests for this EC2 pull thing are actually
> > much faster now. Gary and our other devs have reworked it. I need updated
> > numbers, but they don't take 10s, probably more like 2s. We still have some
> > heavy ~5s services though, so the same issue exists with the simul-req
> > stuff, just to less extent. We don't actually hit this limit much now with
> > the current beta that is in production, but it is low traffic at the moment.
> > We are just getting ready to ramp up heavily.
>
> > > > I asked Nick what we should do, well just today after my last email, I
> > have made contact with a Developer Advocate and whatnot, which is fantastic.
> > It looks like we, as a business, will be able to have better contact with
> > the GAE team. We would very much like to continue working with you to figure
> > out what actions we can take and what provisioning we can do to make our
> > product successful and scale it as we grow in the near future. Gary Orser
> > will be replying to this thread soon with more findings from both our real
> > app code and a little test app we are using and which he will share with
> > you.
>
> > > > We plan on having a presence at Google I/O this year as we did at
> > PyCon. Hopefully we can even get setup in the demonstration area at I/O.
>
> > > > Thanks Nick for your help. Could we possibly setup a quick skype conf
> > call at some point?
>
> > > > -Mike Wesner
>
> > > > On Mar 1, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Michael Wesner wrote:
>
> > > > > Nick,
>
> > > > > If we (I work with Gary) require fairly heavy requests which run for
> > multiple seconds then it is not possible to get anywhere near 400 QPS. The
> > math used on the docs page only applies to 75ms requests.
>
> > > > > (1000 ms/second / 75 ms/request) * 30 = 400 requests/second
>
> > > > > so lets say each request takes 10 seconds (and ours, pulling data to
> > EC2 for a heavy operation that we can't do on GAE could take that much since
> > we have to process and update some XML before sending it)
>
> > > > > (1000 ms/second / 10000 ms/request) * 30 = 3 requests/second
>
> > > > > And that does not even take into account all the other traffic to our
> > application, nor the fact that many users could be doing this same heavy
> > operation at the same time. Our application will see spikes in this type of
> > activity also. The docs also mention that CPU heavy apps incur penalties,
> > which is vague and scary.
>
> > > > > Great effort is put into doing things in the most efficient way
> > possible, but not everyones apps can do everything in 75ms. Most all of our
> > service calls are under 250ms. We do have a little overhead from our
> > framework which we are constantly working on improving. Our application is
> > AMF service/object based which is inherently heavy compared to simple web
> > requests. It limits the amount of memcache work we can do also, but we are
> > also working on improving our use of that.
>
> > > > > We easily hit these boundaries during testing so I think we really
> > need much higher simultaneous dynamic request limits for not only our
> > production instance but our dev/qa instances so we can test and load them to
> > some degree. Our QA team could easily bust this limit 20 times over.
>
> > > > > So, Nick Johnson... I ask your advice. We are running a
> > company/product on GAE. We are more than happy to pay for
> > quota/service/extra assistance in these matters. What do you suggest we do?
>
> > > > > I should also mention that I spoke with Brett Slatkin at PyCon and he
> > is now at least semi-familiar with the scope of product we have developed.
> > I have exchanged contact info with him but have not heard anything back
> > from him yet. We would really appreciate contact or even a brief meeting at
> > some point (in person or otherwise).
>
> > > > > Thanks,
>
> > > > > -Mike Wesner
>
> > > > > On Mar 1, 2010, at 7:40 AM, Nick Johnson (Google) wrote:
>
> > > > >> Hi Gary,
>
> > > > >> Practically speaking, for an app that hasn't been given elevated
> > permissions, you should be able to have at least 30 concurrent requests -
> > equating to around 400 QPS if your app is fairly efficient. What problems
> > are you running into that lead you to conclude you're hitting a limit at 4
> > QPS, and that the problem is at App Engine's end?
>
> > > > >> -Nick Johnson
>
> > > > >> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Gary Orser <garyor...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >> Hi all,
>
> > > > >> We were trying to create programmatic parallel access to our
> > appengine
> > > > >> application.
>
> > > > >> From EC2, we were attempting (with threads) to run parallel access
> > > > >> (url gets/posts) to
> > > > >> our appid. There are some long running processes that we need to
> > run
> > > > >> on EC2, for which
> > > > >> we would like to get a bunch of information (entities + processing
> > on
> > > > >> appspot) quickly.
>
> > > > >> We seem to be running into a limit on the number of accesses that
> > are
> > > > >> allowed.
> > > > >> (4 threads seems to be the effective limit)
>
> > > > >> Is there some sort of denial of service limit imposed on multiple
> > > > >> accesses from a single IP?
>
> > > > >> Cheers, Gary
>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> 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-appeng...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > > > >> For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine
> > > > >> Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration
> > Number: 368047
>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> 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-appeng...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > > > >> For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > 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-appeng...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-appengine%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
>
> --
> Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine
> Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number:
> 368047
--
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-appeng...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
