On Friday, February 14, 2014 2:13:20 PM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: > > > > On Friday, February 14, 2014 6:23:38 AM UTC+8, Nick wrote: >> >> Hi Tapir, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this '*I think it >> can't solve the warmup problem*'. >> >> Unfortunately (for everyone) there's no real avoiding waiting for startup >> of your app with appengine right now. >> The best you can do is make it as quick as possible. The key is to avoid >> any classpath scanning, and have the lightest possible amount of >> initialisation code. >> >> The online docs also suggest that number of files plays some part, but >> i've never really seen any evidence of this. >> A basic thundr app has around a 4 second startup on appengine, obviously >> as you add in more initialisation that goes up. >> > > I tried uploading a simplest java project with only 2 jsp files. The > warmup needs 5-7 seconds. I think the project can't be simpler. > > So, to stick to java, I plan to migrate my project to a dedicated server > later. > GAE instances are too expensive. >
Here is the usage of my project at Feb 12. <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-mhy975rsUSc/Uv24PtADuXI/AAAAAAAAAEk/sW6FHrTMATc/s1600/gae8.png> And here is the Google Analytics result of my website at the same day: <https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-LintFG9PREo/Uv243REzgpI/AAAAAAAAAEs/6ZZyxo-C64Y/s1600/gae9.png> The advertisement revenue of the day is about 0.2$, I think. Which means the money I paid to Google is more than I earned. So I think my website is unsustainable if I stick to App Engine. Maybe it is related to Java, or not. > Big Table in App Engine is only feature I can't find a competitive > alternative in services provided by other companies. > So I will still keep an app engine instance being used as Big Table proxy. > > >> >> In terms of having no choice but accepting a compromise, this is pretty >> fast IMO. >> >> If anyone has experience in getting apps to start up quickly then I would >> love love love if they could write a separate post on the topic. >> >> On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 4:32:23 PM UTC+11, Tapir wrote: >>> >>> I really like the basic part of your framework, the python route config >>> style and the simple view files. >>> >>> For it is also based on servlet, I think it can't solve the warmup >>> problem. >>> Bit I would give it a try in my later new projects. >>> >>> On Monday, February 10, 2014 5:29:32 AM UTC+8, Nick wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Tapir, >>>> >>>> You could give porting your spring app over to the thundr framework a >>>> go: >>>> http://3wks.github.io/thundr/ (usual disclaimer, I'm a maintainer) >>>> >>>> The basic concepts are very similar to spring, so it should be >>>> relatively simple. Its designed specifically to have fast boot up times on >>>> appengine (i.e. no classpath scanning etc). The easiest way to check it >>>> out >>>> is to clone the sample app and run it in dev mode. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/3wks/thundr-sample >>>> >>>> Be aware that we're imminently coming up on the next major release >>>> version, so the sample is a little 'out of date'. >>>> You can get in touch directly with any questions from the docs page (or >>>> join our google group) >>>> >>>> To the point directly, I think its totally infeasible to maintain any >>>> reasonable sized java app without some framework. Besides Spring, i don't >>>> feel there are many viable options. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Friday, February 7, 2014 3:16:14 PM UTC+11, Tapir wrote: >>>>> >>>>> For the size of my project, I think it is impractical to port it to >>>>> other languages. :( >>>>> I tried python and go, their warmup time is very short. For python, it >>>>> is less than one second, for go, it is less than 0.5 second I think. >>>>> But Java still has a big advantage: large quantity of libraries. >>>>> So if GAE team can make the warmup time of a pure jsp/servelt project >>>>> be less than 1.5 seconds, I will be still happy to stick to Java. >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, February 7, 2014 2:28:04 AM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Depends on the size of your project. >>>>>> >>>>>> I started with plain java/jsp. >>>>>> >>>>>> As the project grew the overhead of maintenance was so big that we >>>>>> opted to moving everything to spring-mvc. >>>>>> >>>>>> That move increased the instance boot time from 7 to 35 seconds. In >>>>>> order to overcome cold startups we had to add 6 extra "resident" >>>>>> instances. >>>>>> It means a monthly $300 commitment just to run an MVC framework. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. It's frustrating and expensive. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wouldn't advising starting a java project in appengine. It seems >>>>>> they're investing much more on other languages. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Rafa >>>>>> On Feb 5, 2014 9:36 PM, "Tapir" <tapi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Is it worth dong it? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to google-a...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
