If Warmup Requests worked as expected, they would indeed solve the problem. But all you have to do is browse the many threads on this subject to realize that they do not prevent user requests from hitting cold instance starts. It just doesn't work that way.
The magical checkbox combined with at least one resident instance would indeed be a perfect solution. It tells the scheduler: "You can use the pending queue and average latency data to determine if and when to spin up new instances at load. But DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, send a user facing request to an instance until it has been warmed up. I don't give a damn how long you think it might take to get served, because I know it will be far shorter than waiting for the instance start 99.9% of the time." On Monday, February 4, 2013 8:09:22 AM UTC-5, mooose wrote: > > Not clear to me, where your problems really are, cause I am just using the > Warmup Requests > https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/inboundservices > And this is working for my app. > > Maybe you have a different problem, but for my application, this was the > solution. > > - Siegfried > > > On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:25 AM, gafal <gael....@gmail.com > <javascript:>>wrote: > >> After months of complaining about user-facin**g loading requests, I'm >> burned. I'm quitting. >> >> I'm sad about it. I really enjoyed GAE beside this Critical issue (yes, >> this is critical to my customers, so its critical to me and should be >> critical to you). >> I don't think Google would accept to have it's search engine displaying >> results after 20 to 25 seconds to some customers because they reach a cold >> instance :-) >> Why would we? Why did you leave us in that situation? >> >> No solution or workaround has ever been provided. We just saw the GAE >> development team sticking to its position :-( >> Maybe because the scheduler is performing as designed? Customers are not >> satisfied so please, redesign it. >> >> There 's a lot of work awaiting me to get out of GAE framework since I've >> been using a lot of the provided services. >> I'm really angry about that. That's a lesson hardly learned: avoid >> provider locking* even with Google*. >> >> It was too good to be true. >> >> Gael >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google App Engine" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to google-appengi...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to >> google-a...@googlegroups.com<javascript:> >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > > > -- > Siegfried Hirsch > hhS - Lipowskystr. 16 - 81373 München - (089) 5484 3564 - skype:shirsch > Fax +49 - (0)89 - 943 992 698 - http://siegfriedhirsch.blogspot.com > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
