Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Honestly, every one will have different experiences, to make blanket statements about how it is expensive just doesn't fly. I can argue and with figures to back my statement up. Maybe you application doesn't suit the appengine model. I have a system with around 2000 daily users (they must use the system for certification, so it is compulsory for 3-5 years. Numbers will be twice that within 6 months). This system went live in July 2010. It costs only $2-$3 a day, we generally don't have problems with 'hiccoughs' and the amount we save in not having to manage any infrastructure at all is worth a great deal more than $2 a day. Ultimately it's horses for courses. Maybe you picked the wrong platform for you application, maybe you made bad architectural choices, but to suggest you experience holds for all other use cases is quite ridiculous. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:55:26 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: alex, I keep using appengine because my service is too big for a migration. I'm the founder of the company. We chose appengine when it launched. At the time the costs we more than 3 times less. They changed the price and our service was already built, so we've got locked in. Do the calculations. I would rather hire a $300k/year engineer that can scale the service with $5k a month, rather than hiring a $120k that would scale at $60k month. Again, we're not in the 70's anymore. It's not that difficult to do what you're describing. I'm not arguing. This is not a discussion. Nobody can argue that appengine is a good choice costs wise. There are plenty of wonderful things about appengine, but cost is certainly not one of them, so please stop fake-ing :) bye rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, alex al...@cloudware.it javascript:wrote: Totally agree with Jim and Tim. But, I think it's a waste of time trying to reason with guys like Rafael and coto. They keep forgetting the cost of software and hardware maintainance, monitoring, load balancing, scaling, intrastructure stack, reliability, etc, no matter how many times you try to explain it. Sometimes, I wonder why they keep using App Engine. Maybe it's just because their companies actually did proper ROI/TCO calculations. On 21 January 2014 07:35, Rafael mufu...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver-produktmatrix-ex With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require additional capex expenditure and incremental ongoing opex. Depending on the profile of your application and the system load, at some point you will pass the threshold of it being cheaper to build and maintain
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Hi timh, Please, read the title of this thread. The use case is clear: snapchat If my bill is quite expensive with a couple million uniques a month, imagine theirs with a couple hundred million? Best, Rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:16 AM, timh zutes...@gmail.com wrote: Honestly, every one will have different experiences, to make blanket statements about how it is expensive just doesn't fly. I can argue and with figures to back my statement up. Maybe you application doesn't suit the appengine model. I have a system with around 2000 daily users (they must use the system for certification, so it is compulsory for 3-5 years. Numbers will be twice that within 6 months). This system went live in July 2010. It costs only $2-$3 a day, we generally don't have problems with 'hiccoughs' and the amount we save in not having to manage any infrastructure at all is worth a great deal more than $2 a day. Ultimately it's horses for courses. Maybe you picked the wrong platform for you application, maybe you made bad architectural choices, but to suggest you experience holds for all other use cases is quite ridiculous. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:55:26 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: alex, I keep using appengine because my service is too big for a migration. I'm the founder of the company. We chose appengine when it launched. At the time the costs we more than 3 times less. They changed the price and our service was already built, so we've got locked in. Do the calculations. I would rather hire a $300k/year engineer that can scale the service with $5k a month, rather than hiring a $120k that would scale at $60k month. Again, we're not in the 70's anymore. It's not that difficult to do what you're describing. I'm not arguing. This is not a discussion. Nobody can argue that appengine is a good choice costs wise. There are plenty of wonderful things about appengine, but cost is certainly not one of them, so please stop fake-ing :) bye rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, alex al...@cloudware.it wrote: Totally agree with Jim and Tim. But, I think it's a waste of time trying to reason with guys like Rafael and coto. They keep forgetting the cost of software and hardware maintainance, monitoring, load balancing, scaling, intrastructure stack, reliability, etc, no matter how many times you try to explain it. Sometimes, I wonder why they keep using App Engine. Maybe it's just because their companies actually did proper ROI/TCO calculations. On 21 January 2014 07:35, Rafael mufu...@gmail.com wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-ex With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Yes the thread title might say that, but you keep saying it is too expensive in all cases.. without any qualification. Other than it costs you a lot to do what you do. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:34:40 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: Hi timh, Please, read the title of this thread. The use case is clear: snapchat If my bill is quite expensive with a couple million uniques a month, imagine theirs with a couple hundred million? Best, Rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:16 AM, timh zute...@gmail.com javascript:wrote: Honestly, every one will have different experiences, to make blanket statements about how it is expensive just doesn't fly. I can argue and with figures to back my statement up. Maybe you application doesn't suit the appengine model. I have a system with around 2000 daily users (they must use the system for certification, so it is compulsory for 3-5 years. Numbers will be twice that within 6 months). This system went live in July 2010. It costs only $2-$3 a day, we generally don't have problems with 'hiccoughs' and the amount we save in not having to manage any infrastructure at all is worth a great deal more than $2 a day. Ultimately it's horses for courses. Maybe you picked the wrong platform for you application, maybe you made bad architectural choices, but to suggest you experience holds for all other use cases is quite ridiculous. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:55:26 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: alex, I keep using appengine because my service is too big for a migration. I'm the founder of the company. We chose appengine when it launched. At the time the costs we more than 3 times less. They changed the price and our service was already built, so we've got locked in. Do the calculations. I would rather hire a $300k/year engineer that can scale the service with $5k a month, rather than hiring a $120k that would scale at $60k month. Again, we're not in the 70's anymore. It's not that difficult to do what you're describing. I'm not arguing. This is not a discussion. Nobody can argue that appengine is a good choice costs wise. There are plenty of wonderful things about appengine, but cost is certainly not one of them, so please stop fake-ing :) bye rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, alex al...@cloudware.it wrote: Totally agree with Jim and Tim. But, I think it's a waste of time trying to reason with guys like Rafael and coto. They keep forgetting the cost of software and hardware maintainance, monitoring, load balancing, scaling, intrastructure stack, reliability, etc, no matter how many times you try to explain it. Sometimes, I wonder why they keep using App Engine. Maybe it's just because their companies actually did proper ROI/TCO calculations. On 21 January 2014 07:35, Rafael mufu...@gmail.com wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-ex With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
timh, you pay $60 a month for running a service for 2000 daily users. that's quite expensive don't you think? you're the one telling i'm ridiculous, when the only thing I am saying is that no one can argue that appengine is a good choice when it comes to costs. best, rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:50 AM, timh zutes...@gmail.com wrote: Yes the thread title might say that, but you keep saying it is too expensive in all cases.. without any qualification. Other than it costs you a lot to do what you do. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:34:40 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: Hi timh, Please, read the title of this thread. The use case is clear: snapchat If my bill is quite expensive with a couple million uniques a month, imagine theirs with a couple hundred million? Best, Rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:16 AM, timh zute...@gmail.com wrote: Honestly, every one will have different experiences, to make blanket statements about how it is expensive just doesn't fly. I can argue and with figures to back my statement up. Maybe you application doesn't suit the appengine model. I have a system with around 2000 daily users (they must use the system for certification, so it is compulsory for 3-5 years. Numbers will be twice that within 6 months). This system went live in July 2010. It costs only $2-$3 a day, we generally don't have problems with 'hiccoughs' and the amount we save in not having to manage any infrastructure at all is worth a great deal more than $2 a day. Ultimately it's horses for courses. Maybe you picked the wrong platform for you application, maybe you made bad architectural choices, but to suggest you experience holds for all other use cases is quite ridiculous. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:55:26 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: alex, I keep using appengine because my service is too big for a migration. I'm the founder of the company. We chose appengine when it launched. At the time the costs we more than 3 times less. They changed the price and our service was already built, so we've got locked in. Do the calculations. I would rather hire a $300k/year engineer that can scale the service with $5k a month, rather than hiring a $120k that would scale at $60k month. Again, we're not in the 70's anymore. It's not that difficult to do what you're describing. I'm not arguing. This is not a discussion. Nobody can argue that appengine is a good choice costs wise. There are plenty of wonderful things about appengine, but cost is certainly not one of them, so please stop fake-ing :) bye rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, alex al...@cloudware.it wrote: Totally agree with Jim and Tim. But, I think it's a waste of time trying to reason with guys like Rafael and coto. They keep forgetting the cost of software and hardware maintainance, monitoring, load balancing, scaling, intrastructure stack, reliability, etc, no matter how many times you try to explain it. Sometimes, I wonder why they keep using App Engine. Maybe it's just because their companies actually did proper ROI/TCO calculations. On 21 January 2014 07:35, Rafael mufu...@gmail.com wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver- produktmatrix-ex With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 5:21:43 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: timh, you pay $60 a month for running a service for 2000 daily users. Yes. it really is very cost effective. No full stack, no OS to worry about. etc. I said it was ridiculous to suggest it is too expensive for everyone without qualification, which is what you are saying. Scaling on other services takes more effort, than appengine. that's quite expensive don't you think? Not at all. If I had to factor in all the support people, that would be required and the effort to keep OS, dbms, apache etc... up to date, patched etc that alone would be more expensive than the hosting by a considerable margin. For many business the cost factor of the hosting is not the concern, the support cost is. you're the one telling i'm ridiculous, when the only thing I am saying is that no one can argue that appengine is a good choice when it comes to costs. I will restate - to suggest that it is too expensive for everyone without qualification is ridiculous. I accept it is too expensive for you., and maybe snapchat - who knows ! But for all of the projects I have been involved with appengine has been worth every penny/$ I am not trying to defend appengine as a fan boy. It just makes sense as a PAAS for me and I for one have no time to manage even IAAS based systems. Let alone my own hardware T best, rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:50 AM, timh zute...@gmail.com javascript:wrote: Yes the thread title might say that, but you keep saying it is too expensive in all cases.. without any qualification. Other than it costs you a lot to do what you do. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 4:34:40 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: Hi timh, Please, read the title of this thread. The use case is clear: snapchat If my bill is quite expensive with a couple million uniques a month, imagine theirs with a couple hundred million? Best, Rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:16 AM, timh zute...@gmail.com wrote: Honestly, every one will have different experiences, to make blanket statements about how it is expensive just doesn't fly. I can argue and with figures to back my statement up. Maybe you application doesn't suit the appengine model. I have a system with around 2000 daily users (they must use the system for certification, so it is compulsory for 3-5 years. Numbers will be twice that within 6 months). This system went live in July 2010. It costs only $2-$3 a day, we generally don't have problems with 'hiccoughs' and the amount we save in not having to manage any infrastructure at all is worth a great deal more than $2 a day. Ultimately it's horses for courses. Maybe you picked the wrong platform for you application, maybe you made bad architectural choices, but to suggest you experience holds for all other use cases is quite ridiculous. T On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:55:26 PM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: alex, I keep using appengine because my service is too big for a migration. I'm the founder of the company. We chose appengine when it launched. At the time the costs we more than 3 times less. They changed the price and our service was already built, so we've got locked in. Do the calculations. I would rather hire a $300k/year engineer that can scale the service with $5k a month, rather than hiring a $120k that would scale at $60k month. Again, we're not in the 70's anymore. It's not that difficult to do what you're describing. I'm not arguing. This is not a discussion. Nobody can argue that appengine is a good choice costs wise. There are plenty of wonderful things about appengine, but cost is certainly not one of them, so please stop fake-ing :) bye rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:43 PM, alex al...@cloudware.it wrote: Totally agree with Jim and Tim. But, I think it's a waste of time trying to reason with guys like Rafael and coto. They keep forgetting the cost of software and hardware maintainance, monitoring, load balancing, scaling, intrastructure stack, reliability, etc, no matter how many times you try to explain it. Sometimes, I wonder why they keep using App Engine. Maybe it's just because their companies actually did proper ROI/TCO calculations. On 21 January 2014 07:35, Rafael mufu...@gmail.com wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver- produktmatrix-ex With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
I agree that it's apples and oranges in comparison I'm also using hetzner for a side project, One fair warning, years ago I was using serverloft, another german company, and one of the relatively good ones, servers used to fail (expected once in a while) but the worst thing was that, they used to hibernate the servers for extremely small reasons, once a small time lawyer sent a notice to serverloft indicating a copyrighted image of theirs was on my server and they hibernated the server costing me 100$'s I also tested their cloud offering when they first launched it, their pricing was buggy, they wanted me to pay the excessive costs that arose from their mistakes and disabled my account when I refused (I had 2-3 servers with them for years before this happened) Same thing happened on Appengine, one of my old apps accumulated 600$+ or something, If I'm not mistaken, the payment was enabled but the app was an unused old M/S version, and appengine just dismissed the charges Although products are not really comparable, I like the Amazon's minimal pricing strategy, reducing prices instead of increasing them, good guy Amazon, offtopic I think we might see something similar from Appengine soon, things have been always improving with Appengine with the one exception (the pricing change, years ago) Compute Engine seems to be able to access Appengine services, db etc. I think there might come a point where running a service similar to Appengine on Compute Engine would be easy and cheaper, at that point we might see a decrease in prices I've been using Appengine on a relatively large scale, income costs although friction in my service is really high, sometimes low-friction parts of my service gets a high traffic, although income increases, the costs stay the same, I have a feeling that simple, low-processing/db apps might see incomparably low costs compared to incomes With a new app I've been paying 6-7$ a day for almost no traffic and although I pay high for low delays, I've been seeing failed requests when I access the app when It's cold, it's not the initial request that's failing, but the initial ajax requests, which might be triggering new instances I've always seen people complain about this issue, now I see why At large scale things seem to work better, but if the app is not monetized, running a high traffic app, or aiming high with an app comes with it's paranoid thoughts. There is a chance that a built-app might become popular and costs might drive the owner bankrupt, it's one of my feared worst case scenarios lately I wonder how much Snapchat or other relatively high traffic services pay, as Rafael pointed out, since their product is seemingly simple, the costs might be surprisingly low too -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Just for the record, the app I was talking about might only have 2000 users, but it is by no means a simple application. I has approximateley 30 different models. Fully defined with RBAC security model scoped down to parts of models. reporting, audit trail records for every change to data, (when and what was changed, by who), etc The entire system is modeled in UML, python models, views, URL paths, security declarations, form schemas all directly generated from the model. What elements of a view appear for the combination of user, context, and view control page layout, so the application is intensely dynamic and most cached data's scope is only effective for a single user. So even complex applications can be run in a cost effective manner on appengine. But no point trying to stick a square peg in a round whole. If you data model, or processing requirements don't suit appengine and you can't start instances quickly then you may well be on the wrong platform. Now more than my 2c worth ;-) T -- 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.
[google-appengine] Re: online form/invoice designer
Hi Aswath, I'm currently looking to do exactly this. Did you find anything out there? (or write your own?) many thanks, Doug On Saturday, March 30, 2013 7:04:12 AM UTC, aswath wrote: Hello, We are developing an accounting SaaS using servlets/jsps and gwt The users would like to create their own invoice template for print purpose. Here are the simple steps I am imagining. - A form designer to the left side (3/4 of the window). - A list of Invoice variables displayed on the right. - The user can drag drop the invoice variables into the form - Save the template as a HTML with placeholders for the variables.(Some convention to identify the placeholders in the HTML) Are there any tools/companies or opensource projects which can perform the above. I should be able to integrate that project into my own web application. -Aswath -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Rafael Sanches r...@allthecooks.com wrote: you pay $60 a month for running a service for 2000 daily users. that's quite expensive don't you think? Even for my one man and his dog shop, $60 per month would be a trivial expense. If I'd put any reasonable price tag on my time, the cost of reading this list would probably be close to that per month. -- Pertti -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Again, I love appengine and I love what google engineers are doing with it. They are amazingly skilled people and are improving the platform as fast as they can. The only thing you can't tell me is that it's a good deal pricing wise. The pricing is just disturbing if you want to do something at scale. Our company was bootstrapping for two years and we were forced to raise capital in order to pay appengine bills. Of course we could flood our users with ads, but that's not what we are passionate about. -- timh, People like me have started with appengine because the requirements and pricing was right at the time. As you might know, requirements and pricing changes through time and server migration can kill companies. Kaan, My service is the typical 1mm subscribers social network. The $$ is spent mostly in read and writes and output bandwidth. It's definitely more expensive and complex than snapchat. Immediate hacks snapchat must to do in order to stay below $100k a month in server costs: - keep a pool of at least 20 resident instances. (they become SO idle that become zombines and never respond anymore, but you're paying expensively for it) - move the output bandwidth to a cheaper CDN. moving my image serving to maxcdn has reduced my output bandwidth costs from $2000 a month to $300. - Snapchat probably doesn't need this, but twitter/facebook would definitively need: separate the push notification service in other module and then keep a pool of at least 10 resident instances again. this would be necessary to reduce spike effect (instances booting like crazy) with the britney spears tweets. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:52 AM, timh zutes...@gmail.com wrote: Just for the record, the app I was talking about might only have 2000 users, but it is by no means a simple application. I has approximateley 30 different models. Fully defined with RBAC security model scoped down to parts of models. reporting, audit trail records for every change to data, (when and what was changed, by who), etc The entire system is modeled in UML, python models, views, URL paths, security declarations, form schemas all directly generated from the model. What elements of a view appear for the combination of user, context, and view control page layout, so the application is intensely dynamic and most cached data's scope is only effective for a single user. So even complex applications can be run in a cost effective manner on appengine. But no point trying to stick a square peg in a round whole. If you data model, or processing requirements don't suit appengine and you can't start instances quickly then you may well be on the wrong platform. Now more than my 2c worth ;-) T -- 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. -- 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.
[google-appengine] Re: Test delete using JPA
share the code for proper answering. I was getting this exception because In my delete function i was using this query DELETE LC FROM LoginConfiguration LC . While the correct one is DELETE FROM LoginConfiguration LC . On Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:04:14 PM UTC+5, Werney Ayala wrote: I created a test that checks whether an object has been deleted from the database, but always returns the following error: Candidate class could not be found: DELETE Find, save and list work perfectly. Has anyone had this error? How to solve? -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com javascript:wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require additional capex expenditure and incremental ongoing opex. Depending on the profile of your application and the system load, at some point you will pass the threshold of it being cheaper to build and maintain your own equivalent infrastructure, but that threshold is very, very high. So it makes me think people who say GAE is 'expensive' are not making a comparison such as this. Maybe they don't really need everything that GAE offers. Or perhaps they are comparing GAE to other cloud offerings such as AWS? Amazon's pricing doesn't seem to be radically different than Google's to me, for similar services. And given that Amazon's PaaS solution is not yet as complete at GAE, I think that any complete appliation built on AWS is going to require some level of system-engineering. System engineers are not cheap. One of the things we like about GAE is that, at this point in our corporate evolution, we can focus entirely on our Customers and our Software and not spend money or time configuring hardware, OS and other low level stuff that we (as application software guys) don't want to mess with. There are very real hard and soft monetary benefits to this. Or maybe when people say expensive they mean as compared to other cloud offerings that are more along the lines of rented physical or virtual machines. Yes, some of these can be cheap compared to GAE. But these are really apples-to-oranges comparisons when you consider all the things you need to provision a global, utility-grade (aspirationally, anyway) SaaS offering. So I guess this post is a long-winded way of me saying GAE Expensive? Really? What exactly do you mean by that? Compared to what? On Monday, January 20, 2014 4:19:54 AM UTC-6, coto wrote: We all should be surprised, because Google App Engine is
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, especially in this last 5-10 years It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate about major services The 2000$ to 300$ cdn comparison is interesting, however no other service that I know of matches the extreme capabilities of google images service I use the =s/-c resizing/cropping extensively, that's why I could never easily replace appengine, or the cdn You seem to have lived my worst case scenario, going out of money and having to ask others for money. Anyway if you don't mind it would be great to learn more about your product/story, but I'm guessing it's better to keep things as private as possible :) On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC+2, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require additional capex expenditure and incremental ongoing opex. Depending on the profile of your application and the system load, at some point you will pass the threshold of it being cheaper to build and maintain your own equivalent infrastructure, but that threshold is very, very high. So it makes me think people who say GAE is 'expensive' are not making a comparison such as this. Maybe they don't really need everything that GAE offers. Or perhaps they are comparing GAE to other cloud offerings such as AWS? Amazon's pricing doesn't seem to be radically different than Google's to me, for similar services. And given that Amazon's PaaS solution is not yet as complete at GAE, I think that any complete appliation built on AWS is going to require
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
I only have to say that my company has spent ~$1300 monthly. 3 weeks ago we had high latency for 2 days, the only way to receive assistance was paying $400 for premium support, and the answer of Google's Support Team was: Thanks, we just fixed the issue, it was in our end. Basically, we are now are paying ~$1300 per month for servers, and additionally, $400 for notifying Google they have issues with their services. (common sense says they have to pay us for this) - Rodrigo Augosto (@coto http://twitter.com/coto) On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Jim jeb62...@gmail.com wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require additional capex expenditure and incremental ongoing opex. Depending on the profile of your application and the system load, at some point you will pass the threshold of it being cheaper to build and maintain your own equivalent infrastructure, but that threshold is very, very high. So it makes me think people who say GAE is 'expensive' are not making a comparison such as this. Maybe they don't really need everything that GAE offers. Or perhaps they are comparing GAE to other cloud offerings such as AWS? Amazon's pricing doesn't seem to be radically different than Google's to me, for similar services. And given that Amazon's PaaS solution is not yet as complete at GAE, I think that any complete appliation built on AWS is going to require some level of system-engineering. System engineers are not cheap. One of the things we like about GAE is that, at this point in our corporate evolution, we can focus entirely on our Customers and our Software and not spend money or time configuring hardware, OS and other low level stuff that we (as application software guys) don't want to mess with. There are very real hard and soft monetary benefits to this. Or maybe when people say expensive they mean as compared to other cloud offerings that are more along the
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Jim, In 2014 a good engineer can create your own cloud infrastructure with 10 machines like the ones I suggested. Again, I am not saying that I don't like appengine. In fact, I love it and that's why I stick with it. I am saying it's over priced to run a service like Snapchat. I don't think there's any argument there. Kaan, This is my gift to you: https://gist.github.com/mufumbo/8547036 It extends all of the appengine image features: =s/-c and includes the most useful one: =h Depending on appengine's image serving is a limitation, since vertical cropping is extremely useful on many elegant websites. For example, play around with: http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s682=h300 or http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s300=h600 By the way, another way to reduce server costs is to pay the $400 or $200 a month in support. That way you get access to discounted instance hours. It decreased our bill a bit and give access to a place to get feedback when appengine is having problems or when you need to tweak your scheduling and performance parameters that you don't have access from XML config. About three months ago I spent a whole month optimizing my servers to reduce the costs from $10k to $5k. Even now, I feel it's too overpriced for the performance it's delivering. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Kaan Soral kaanso...@gmail.com wrote: I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, especially in this last 5-10 years It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate about major services The 2000$ to 300$ cdn comparison is interesting, however no other service that I know of matches the extreme capabilities of google images service I use the =s/-c resizing/cropping extensively, that's why I could never easily replace appengine, or the cdn You seem to have lived my worst case scenario, going out of money and having to ask others for money. Anyway if you don't mind it would be great to learn more about your product/story, but I'm guessing it's better to keep things as private as possible :) On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC+2, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type)
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Thanks :) Very impressive and inspiring, I've never considered rectangle cropping up to this point, although I have ancient routines to find the right =s value for width/height/retina etc On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:58:56 PM UTC+2, Rafael Sanches wrote: Jim, In 2014 a good engineer can create your own cloud infrastructure with 10 machines like the ones I suggested. Again, I am not saying that I don't like appengine. In fact, I love it and that's why I stick with it. I am saying it's over priced to run a service like Snapchat. I don't think there's any argument there. Kaan, This is my gift to you: https://gist.github.com/mufumbo/8547036 It extends all of the appengine image features: =s/-c and includes the most useful one: =h Depending on appengine's image serving is a limitation, since vertical cropping is extremely useful on many elegant websites. For example, play around with: http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s682=h300 or http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s300=h600 By the way, another way to reduce server costs is to pay the $400 or $200 a month in support. That way you get access to discounted instance hours. It decreased our bill a bit and give access to a place to get feedback when appengine is having problems or when you need to tweak your scheduling and performance parameters that you don't have access from XML config. About three months ago I spent a whole month optimizing my servers to reduce the costs from $10k to $5k. Even now, I feel it's too overpriced for the performance it's delivering. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Kaan Soral kaan...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, especially in this last 5-10 years It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate about major services The 2000$ to 300$ cdn comparison is interesting, however no other service that I know of matches the extreme capabilities of google images service I use the =s/-c resizing/cropping extensively, that's why I could never easily replace appengine, or the cdn You seem to have lived my worst case scenario, going out of money and having to ask others for money. Anyway if you don't mind it would be great to learn more about your product/story, but I'm guessing it's better to keep things as private as possible :) On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC+2, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Yes, I'm quite aware of the various cloud stacks out there and have worked on projects using several of them including AWS and CloudStack. Glad to see you're moving away from your $50 a month claim and it's now at 10 X $50 a month. Now let's talk about geographically dispersed services with automated fail-over. Then let's talk about what that good engineer you have costs you. You really want to run your business on a platform with a single engineer behind it? Does he/she get to sleep or go on vacation? What happens when he/she quits? You sure that cheap little hosting provider has the network bandwidth and resiliency you are going to need? Now triple your infrastructure to be able to handle the hoped-for huge spike in volume. Now crunch the numbers again and tell me what the savings really is. It ain't anywhere close to $3,950 a month, that I am sure of. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 1:58:56 PM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Jim, In 2014 a good engineer can create your own cloud infrastructure with 10 machines like the ones I suggested. Again, I am not saying that I don't like appengine. In fact, I love it and that's why I stick with it. I am saying it's over priced to run a service like Snapchat. I don't think there's any argument there. Kaan, This is my gift to you: https://gist.github.com/mufumbo/8547036 It extends all of the appengine image features: =s/-c and includes the most useful one: =h Depending on appengine's image serving is a limitation, since vertical cropping is extremely useful on many elegant websites. For example, play around with: http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s682=h300 or http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s300=h600 By the way, another way to reduce server costs is to pay the $400 or $200 a month in support. That way you get access to discounted instance hours. It decreased our bill a bit and give access to a place to get feedback when appengine is having problems or when you need to tweak your scheduling and performance parameters that you don't have access from XML config. About three months ago I spent a whole month optimizing my servers to reduce the costs from $10k to $5k. Even now, I feel it's too overpriced for the performance it's delivering. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Kaan Soral kaan...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, especially in this last 5-10 years It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate about major services The 2000$ to 300$ cdn comparison is interesting, however no other service that I know of matches the extreme capabilities of google images service I use the =s/-c resizing/cropping extensively, that's why I could never easily replace appengine, or the cdn You seem to have lived my worst case scenario, going out of money and having to ask others for money. Anyway if you don't mind it would be great to learn more about your product/story, but I'm guessing it's better to keep things as private as possible :) On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC+2, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/ rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
This got heated pretty quickly... Regarding costing, it is very clear to me that PaaS, and particularly GAE are extremely cost effective as long as: You can easily achieve your business goals, They save you operational FTE I think if you step outside of these bounds, then its time to migrate to something where you take more control and responsibility. The cost of doing so is obviously not free, the custom apis do cause vendor locking to an extent. I also think its very easy to underestimate the cost of an engineer (or team of) who can maintain a VM image, apache/nginx, load balancing, memcache, a performant search index, scale a SQL or NoSQL database, sync to a CDN and make it all elastic so you pay minimum server costs. None of that is particularly hard, but if you're at the scale where doing it on a PaaS is not cost effective, you probably need to do this well, or it'll just cost you more on every axis. But at some point, if you need to make this leap, you need to do it. My experience is that very few applications actually need to do this ever. On Wednesday, January 22, 2014 6:16:18 AM UTC+11, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not in 1970 anymore. There is no argue that appengine is the most expensive hosting on earth and possibly the universe. My company spend $4000 a month with appengine. We could host the same service with $50 in a more powerful environment: http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produktmatrix/rootserver-produktmatrix-exhttp://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hetzner.de%2Fen%2Fhosting%2Fproduktmatrix%2Frootserver-produktmatrix-exsa=Dsntz=1usg=AFQjCNHB4pohCO2ZKGcxoTG5sY0nc6pvDw With $300 we could make it redundant and more reliable and faster than appengine. A dedicated server is also more reliable, because of appengine infamous hicupps due to its scheduling system and instance boot time. In one of my services I rent a rack with 20 spaces and it's filled with only 10 severs. It means I can scale my servers with 10 more. That configuration costs $1000. Please, pay attention for 10 dedicated quad-core with 32GB of ram. How much would you pay in appengine for that type of throughput? I did the calculations: $60k. Please, it's incomparable price wise. There's no argue and let's not go there :) thanks rafa On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Jim jeb6...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen many variations of this statement, Google App Engine is expensive!, and it always strikes me as a bit off. I supppose it depends on your perspective and your requirements. For the past three years I've been running a small start-up building a SaaS analytics application. For the prior 25 years or so I built enterprise apps for some well-known software houses. The last 12 years I was building SaaS-based software products serving top-tier global financial institutions. During that time I worked on projects where we built, from the ground up, 2 different web-based solutions which wound up serving tens-of-thousands of end-users and very large volumes of system-to-system (B2B type) transaction volumes. When we created our infrastructure for these systems we needed multiple geographically dispersed data centers, high levels of fault-tolerance within any given data center, n-tier architecture, secure systems, scalable databases and front-end servers, system, security and network monitoring and administration, etc. When you spec that all out from scratch, you will have a hard time doing it for less than several hundred thousand dollars capex with big ongoing opex expense. Any growth beyond your initial headroom will require additional capex expenditure and incremental ongoing opex. Depending on the profile of your application and the system load, at some point you will pass the threshold of it being cheaper to build and maintain your own equivalent infrastructure, but that threshold is very, very high. So it makes me think people who say GAE is 'expensive' are not making a comparison such as this. Maybe they don't really need everything that GAE offers. Or perhaps they are comparing GAE to other cloud offerings such as AWS? Amazon's pricing doesn't seem to be radically different than Google's to me, for similar services. And given that Amazon's PaaS solution is not yet as complete at GAE, I
[google-appengine] How can I use java.io.File(filePath) in AppEngine?
I am trying to use Google + Domains API in GAE, but when I try to create a GoogleCredential I need to use this: .setServiceAccountPrivateKeyFromP12File(new java.io.File(filePath)) Where filePath is a .p12 extension file(private key for authentication) this file I put in WEB-INF folder and I granted permissions to all, but when I try to create the GoogleCredential I get this error: java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.io.FilePermission /WEB-INF/file.p12 read) Obviously the file has the correct name in my folder, this process works in my project which is not AppEngine, so I guess is a problem in the way to access files in AppEngine using java.io.File. If somebody has idea, I would be very thankful. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Jim, It seems you're talking from a point of view of a big corporation. Since snapchat didn't had big funding since short time ago, I was supposed we're talking about startups. Big corporations are another beast where server costs are irrelevant in it's sea of other useless costs and lazy people. I am talking from the point of view of a startup that struggles with cash flow and find itself obligated to raise capital just to pay server costs. I don't know why some people think I am insulting their family when I say that appengine is very expensive for high traffic apps. Can you give me an example where it's not expensive? I am giving my own because I've built high traffic services for appengine, aws, hetzner, rackspace etc. Is geographically dispersed services an essential feature for a startup? It's simple till you complicate it. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Jim jeb62...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, I'm quite aware of the various cloud stacks out there and have worked on projects using several of them including AWS and CloudStack. Glad to see you're moving away from your $50 a month claim and it's now at 10 X $50 a month. Now let's talk about geographically dispersed services with automated fail-over. Then let's talk about what that good engineer you have costs you. You really want to run your business on a platform with a single engineer behind it? Does he/she get to sleep or go on vacation? What happens when he/she quits? You sure that cheap little hosting provider has the network bandwidth and resiliency you are going to need? Now triple your infrastructure to be able to handle the hoped-for huge spike in volume. Now crunch the numbers again and tell me what the savings really is. It ain't anywhere close to $3,950 a month, that I am sure of. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 1:58:56 PM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Jim, In 2014 a good engineer can create your own cloud infrastructure with 10 machines like the ones I suggested. Again, I am not saying that I don't like appengine. In fact, I love it and that's why I stick with it. I am saying it's over priced to run a service like Snapchat. I don't think there's any argument there. Kaan, This is my gift to you: https://gist.github.com/mufumbo/8547036 It extends all of the appengine image features: =s/-c and includes the most useful one: =h Depending on appengine's image serving is a limitation, since vertical cropping is extremely useful on many elegant websites. For example, play around with: http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s682=h300or http://c1.picmix.net/61757192=s300=h600 By the way, another way to reduce server costs is to pay the $400 or $200 a month in support. That way you get access to discounted instance hours. It decreased our bill a bit and give access to a place to get feedback when appengine is having problems or when you need to tweak your scheduling and performance parameters that you don't have access from XML config. About three months ago I spent a whole month optimizing my servers to reduce the costs from $10k to $5k. Even now, I feel it's too overpriced for the performance it's delivering. thanks rafa On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Kaan Soral kaan...@gmail.com wrote: I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, especially in this last 5-10 years It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate about major services The 2000$ to 300$ cdn comparison is interesting, however no other service that I know of matches the extreme capabilities of google images service I use the =s/-c resizing/cropping extensively, that's why I could never easily replace appengine, or the cdn You seem to have lived my worst case scenario, going out of money and having to ask others for money. Anyway if you don't mind it would be great to learn more about your product/story, but I'm guessing it's better to keep things as private as possible :) On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 9:16:18 PM UTC+2, Jim wrote: 1970's? What on earth about my post made you think of the 1970's? My description of geographically redundant, web based applications? Please indeed. The link you provided is for a LAMP hosting service... basically what I described in my third scenario about. That's apples-vs-oranges as compared to GAE. I suggest you consult with the Application Architects where you work and politely ask them to describe the differences to you. Clearly nobody here is getting through to you and I don't have the time or the inclination. On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 12:35:13 AM UTC-6, Rafael Sanches wrote: Guys, Please, we're not
[google-appengine] Python and tests
Hi folks. I have extracted a very basic toolset (https://github.com/rbanffy/testable_appengine) from a larger application because I thought it could be useful to other people who feel uncomfortable with the difficulties in building unit-tests for App Engine apps. I'll be happy if it solves someone else's problems too. -- Ricardo Bánffy http://www.dieblinkenlights.com http://twitter.com/rbanffy -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Unwanted errors in my application's admin console
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Santiago garcia.santi...@gmail.com wrote: 2) How are you monitoring and measuring errors in your GAE apps? I use BigQuery to analyze errors in logs. You can break out errors by status codes if you play around with the tool a bit. http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2012/07/analyzing-your-google-app-engine-logs.html - -Vinny P Technology Media Advisor Chicago, IL App Engine Code Samples: http://www.learntogoogleit.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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] How can I use java.io.File(filePath) in AppEngine?
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Juan de Dios Becerra j.becerra4...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to use Google + Domains API in GAE, but when I try to create a GoogleCredential I need to use this: .setServiceAccountPrivateKeyFromP12File(new java.io.File(filePath)) Where filePath is a .p12 extension file(private key for authentication) this file I put in WEB-INF folder and I granted permissions to all, but when I try to create the GoogleCredential I get this error: java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.io.FilePermission /WEB-INF/file.p12 read) Obviously the file has the correct name in my folder, this process works in my project which is not AppEngine, so I guess is a problem in the way to access files in AppEngine using java.io.File. Java I/O classes, such as File, are limited on App Engine. Try using ServletContext's stream services to collect an inputstream, then read the file normally. For example: *InputStream stream = this.getServletContext().getResourceAsStream(path);* - -Vinny P Technology Media Advisor Chicago, IL App Engine Code Samples: http://www.learntogoogleit.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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: online form/invoice designer
Hello Doug
I did not find any form designer. But, I am thinking the following, so
that the users have some amount of flexibility to design/modify the invoices
- Show the CKEditor for the users - http://ckeditor.com/
- The user designs the HTML invoice with CKEditor
- In the CKEditor, the user places placeholder variables, like ${name},
${zipcode}, ${invoiceNo} at the desired positions
- Save this HTML along with placeholders
- Process the HTML to replace the placeholder variables.
- Here you can use jquery, if you plan on doing on the browser, to
manipulate the placeholder values.
- However, I want to do this process of creating the final invoice on
server. I found the following https://github.com/jawher/moulder-j.
-Aswath
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:58 PM, doright doug.stodd...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Aswath,
I'm currently looking to do exactly this. Did you find anything out
there? (or write your own?)
many thanks,
Doug
On Saturday, March 30, 2013 7:04:12 AM UTC, aswath wrote:
Hello,
We are developing an accounting SaaS using servlets/jsps and gwt
The users would like to create their own invoice template for print
purpose.
Here are the simple steps I am imagining.
- A form designer to the left side (3/4 of the window).
- A list of Invoice variables displayed on the right.
- The user can drag drop the invoice variables into the form
- Save the template as a HTML with placeholders for the variables.(Some
convention to identify the placeholders in the HTML)
Are there any tools/companies or opensource projects which can perform
the above. I should be able to integrate that project into my own web
application.
-Aswath
--
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.
--
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.
