Thank you for the open and honest post-mortem. On Mar 8, 5:03 am, Evil Mushroom Lord <evilmushrooml...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for taking the time to share all this information with us. > Props to you guys. :) > > On Mar 7, 11:33 am, gwstuff <gwsa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > - The current option of low-latency, strong consistency, and lower > > > availability during unexpected failures (like a power outage) > > > > - A new option for higher availability using synchronous replication > > > for reads and writes, at the cost of significantly higher latency > > > This would be fantastic, if one were able to select between the two > > configurations in the same App. That would make it possible for one to > > have a "regular" and a "failsafe" version of a database, where the > > failsafe version is updated less frequently. This makes sense for a > > number of my apps in which it is helpful to give users access to some > > basic data even if the system is basically "down." > > > Thanks also for the nice postmortem. So far, one of the best things > > about using App Engine has been the openness with which information is > > provided to users.
-- 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.
