So after double checking - we do not charge per actual instance, just the number of instances. If you have a case where in 15 minutes, an instance dies and a new instance takes it's place, billing considers that to be one instance running for 15 minutes (not two). This is explained in more detail in the FAQ.
Ikai Lan Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine Blog: http://googleappengine.blogspot.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/app_engine Reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 12:42 PM, an0nym <an0nym...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM, an0nym <an0nym...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > = instance hours vs ram hours = >> >> I don't think this request for so-called "ram-hours" makes much sense. >> I'm willing to bet that when a GAE instance starts up on a box, a >> fixed amount of RAM (the max it could use, say 128MB) is reserved for >> your application no matter how much it is currently using. Even >> though an app may only use 29MB right now, it *could* expand to 128MB >> on a moment's notice. If a couple apps did this suddenly, it could >> push an oversubscribed server into swap and instantly take down every >> app on the box. >> >> So even though you're only using 29MB, you are probably consuming a >> full 128MB of resources. Maybe what you really want are different >> instance sizes. >> > I bet they oversell RAM. Googlers, can anyone confirm or deny this? > With their PaaS limitations and huge load, the law of averages should work > very very very well. If they don't use it, I don't think it's my problem. At > least until the new prices are applied. :) > >> > = 50k quota for datastore ops = >> > That's the killer (will kill appengine :) feature of new pricing >> > policy. Vendor lock-in, nosql instead of sql (I can't say it's >> > worse... it's unaccustomed)... with new pricing policy you go even >> > further - files instead of nosql. Yeap, that's really what datastore >> > will be used like when one need to decrease number of datastore ops - >> > nearly pure old file write/read. By the way, memory consumption (both >> > because of bigger entities and memcache usage intensity) and cpu >> > intensity will increase (maybe that's the point you made instance >> > hours so expensive? predictions?). >> >> I agree with you that the 50k quota for free apps seems small. It's >> also a bit confusing now that different operations cost different >> amounts. Greg, will this free quota be changed to a free $ amount for >> operations? >> >> My suspicion is that (at least in a threaded world) most of the cost >> increase in GAE will come from datastore operations, but I am having a >> hard time picturing it just yet. >> >> Incidentally, you should already be using the datastore a lot more >> like a filestore than a RDBMS. Even ignoring costs, the latency of >> your system will improve dramatically if you heavily denormalize your >> data. And because you can store treeish structured data in a single >> entity, denormalization isn't nearly as ugly as it is in an RDBMS. >> >> Basically, treat the datastore a lot more like the key/value store it >> really is. >> > If I need to fetch/write 200 bytes of data for a small entity, and instead > of this I fetch/write 1 Mb huge entity (by the way, consume google internal > bandwidth, maybe even across datacenters with hrd, I don't even say about > google internal cpu usage intensity increase) in order to get these 200 > bytes out - I end up with higher latency (to parse 1 Mb is longer than to > parse 200 bytes), higher cpu usage intensity (to parse 1 Mb is harder than > to parse 200 bytes), higher memory usage (intermediate results should be > saved somewhere) and higher memcache memory usage (I don't want to parse it > every time, huh). > Are sure google won't increase the prices again because of these points? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/L0wqnCLU29sJ. > > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@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. > -- 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 google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
