I think you are missing my point. Using the Task Queue incurs a very real resource cost to Google, which we don't currently pay for. Granted, that is true of many other services as well, and only Google knows how all the pricing incentives and resource utilization pieces fit together to ensure profitability.
However, I would guess that the Task Queue is backed by Big Table and thus has similar characteristics to datastore access (although it may be highly optimized). This makes me wonder if they are creating an unbalanced situation that they will ultimately have to correct, just like they did with the major pricing shift last year. I am surprised no one else is concerned about it given that history, but I suppose there is nothing we can do about it anway. On Thursday, June 21, 2012 5:33:16 PM UTC-4, vlad wrote: > > I have been using TaskQueue for a long time and this view makes no sense > to me. You are paying the same price for your Instances and DS read/write > when executing a task. To be fair there is a small leeway which GAE gives > you on not charging for storing Task parameters. So you have to weight this > advantage against unpredictable Task scheduling timing. > > >> -- 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/-/-Onv-ccFEj4J. 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.
