Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 3:11:08 PM UTC+8, timh wrote: > > >> What the data all you provide exactly prove GAE is expensive! >> Your sense is not a typical common sense. >> Bill Gates will still think GAE is cheap if the F1 instance is charged >> with $1000 per day. >> > > What on earth are you smoking. How does anything I said support your > argument that GAE is expensive. > > At no point do you EVER compare like for like. So give us all a break. > > I said the cost of the service is far below the 3% revenue. Did you not > see the REALLY REALLY cheap bit. > I am not made of money, but people derive their revenue from other sources > not advertising. > > If you don't like it and it doesn't suit your revenue model then get off > GAE. > you coool! rich man. > > > >> > -- 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
> > > What the data all you provide exactly prove GAE is expensive! > Your sense is not a typical common sense. > Bill Gates will still think GAE is cheap if the F1 instance is charged > with $1000 per day. > What on earth are you smoking. How does anything I said support your argument that GAE is expensive. At no point do you EVER compare like for like. So give us all a break. I said the cost of the service is far below the 3% revenue. Did you not see the REALLY REALLY cheap bit. I am not made of money, but people derive their revenue from other sources not advertising. If you don't like it and it doesn't suit your revenue model then get off GAE. > -- 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 Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:31:53 PM UTC+8, timh wrote: > > So based on a running cost less than 3% of revenue, then this app is > REALLY REALLY REALLY cheap. > Sorry, 3% is just the average value for the hosting world. It is not cheap at all, it is just general. I know many websites the much lower value than 3%. > > I don't have true pageviews because as I said its 80% ajax transactions, > so new template rendering etc so not a comparable measure. But just to > please you on a typical day there is around 2200 pageviews , but between 5 > and 10 times that in terms of ajax transactions (which aren't monitored by > analytics), but to be honest it's not something I really monitor closely as > it not particularly important. > Ok, you have 10,000 requests. $2 per day means you need 48 F1 instance hours. I know you don't like the advertisement. But GAE official never says GAE is not capable for this model. 2200 pageviews means about $3 advertisement revenue. If there is no the free hours, you would pay google $5. The net profit is -$2. (ok, ok, I know you are a rich man, you get a better model. Here, I just descript the situation from the view of common sense) > > Unless you compare features of a service, meeting a minimal base line for > comparison any comparison is meaningless. You know apples and oranges. > > I run another site that derives absolutely no direct revenue, it is their > solely to get get people to visit a bricks and motor shop, and the $2 a day > that is costing > is very cheap as all the advertising we run is Adwords (adwords is > expensive) and the site running costs. Yes I could run it on Digital Ocean > or AWS small instance for probably cheaper, but then I have to look after > infrastructure webstack/database, I do not have the time or inclination to > do that. So my measure of cheap is completely different to yours. > I certainly don't measure the cost or quality of the service or the value > of the outcomes in terms of pageviews per dollar (at least not directly) > > So I am not really going to bother with this discussion any more, in your > opinion GAE is not cheap, in my opinion by all the metrics that I am > interested and the applications I run/develop on appengine it is. Does this > mean I would run all new projects on appengine - absolutely not, I would > pick the best (as much as I could) tool for the job. > What the data all you provide exactly prove GAE is expensive! Your sense is not a typical common sense. Bill Gates will still think GAE is cheap if the F1 instance is charged with $1000 per day. -- 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
So based on a running cost less than 3% of revenue, then this app is REALLY REALLY REALLY cheap. I don't have true pageviews because as I said its 80% ajax transactions, so new template rendering etc so not a comparable measure. But just to please you on a typical day there is around 2200 pageviews , but between 5 and 10 times that in terms of ajax transactions (which aren't monitored by analytics), but to be honest it's not something I really monitor closely as it not particularly important. Unless you compare features of a service, meeting a minimal base line for comparison any comparison is meaningless. You know apples and oranges. I run another site that derives absolutely no direct revenue, it is their solely to get get people to visit a bricks and motor shop, and the $2 a day that is costing is very cheap as all the advertising we run is Adwords (adwords is expensive) and the site running costs. Yes I could run it on Digital Ocean or AWS small instance for probably cheaper, but then I have to look after infrastructure webstack/database, I do not have the time or inclination to do that. So my measure of cheap is completely different to yours. I certainly don't measure the cost or quality of the service or the value of the outcomes in terms of pageviews per dollar (at least not directly) So I am not really going to bother with this discussion any more, in your opinion GAE is not cheap, in my opinion by all the metrics that I am interested and the applications I run/develop on appengine it is. Does this mean I would run all new projects on appengine - absolutely not, I would pick the best (as much as I could) tool for the job. -- 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] Setting com.cn as a serving domain for Google App Engine application via Google Apps?
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Balázs Benedek wrote: > I've just tried to set a .com.cn domain name via Google Apps as a > serving domain, but failed: "Google Apps does not currently support domains > in this country" (it's already registered -- I just wanted to map it) > > Any experience? Any workaround? LIke setting up a proxy via Amazon? > Whatever? Anyhow? > You can try using Cloudflare's reverse proxy service: http://blog.cloudflare.com/top-tips-for-new-cloudflare-users . Map the domain to Cloudflare, and the proxy will handle forwarding requests to App Engine. - -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] Problem: index not created
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:19 AM, David wrote: > > iii) other information: When I deploy, this index entry was in > datastore-indexes-auto.xml too, with source="auto". By rule, the index > should have been generated. > You're 100% correct. If the same index entry is in *datastore-indexes-auto.xml* GAE should be automatically building the index for you, there's no need to add it to *datastore-indexes.xml* as well. Can you try changing the version setting of the application, then reuploading it to the same application ID on App Engine? Sometimes App Engine gets "stuck" on a certain configuration; it may recognize the new index in a new version. If you're using Eclipse, you can change your application's version by going into the *App Engine Project Settings* pane. On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:19 AM, David wrote: > iv) quantityFrom is a Double type. Can do an index from a double type? > You can do an index from any Java numeric type: int, float, double, and so forth (including their object wrappers such as java.lang.Integer, Float, Double, etc). - -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] Min Pending Latency -- does it really do anything?
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Rafael wrote: > The scheduler logic > Regarding the scheduler, this is my favorite thread regarding the subject: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/sA3o-PTAckc/T2eA64xZ1m0J It's a bit long (over 100+ posts) but it has some interesting discussion. - -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: Snapchat
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 11:33:16 AM UTC+8, timh wrote: > > > >> All you above said has nothing related to proving GAE is cheap or not! >> > > Sorry I don't understand what you mean by cheap. What is cheap, compared > with what ? Unless there is some basis for comparison then > > how do you prove/disprove cheapness. > > By any measure for me $5 a day is cheap for the service provided. Tell me > how you want to measure cheap! > compared with common sense. cheapness means the hosting cost is lower than 3% of your revenue. please provide your pageviews per day, is it so hard? > > T > > > > > >> >>> Just my 2c worth >>> >>> T >>> >>> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:54:54 AM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. > 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! > > 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
> > All you above said has nothing related to proving GAE is cheap or not! > Sorry I don't understand what you mean by cheap. What is cheap, compared with what ? Unless there is some basis for comparison then how do you prove/disprove cheapness. By any measure for me $5 a day is cheap for the service provided. Tell me how you want to measure cheap! T > >> Just my 2c worth >> >> T >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:54:54 AM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >>> >>> 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? >>> >>> costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? >>> If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? >>> >>> $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! >>> >>> >>> 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: Ok, I want to create this thread for a long time. --- Please share your GAE success stories!
@timh, could you post your story here? On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:40:32 AM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: > Hi, your story doesn't need to be a success. > Just descript your App Engine experience here from the technology and > business view. > > > On Friday, February 21, 2014 1:28:05 PM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: > >> When you share you story, please DON'T just say "I happy with GAE, bla >> bla bla ..." without any technology and business details. >> (for example, the pdf ones listed at https://cloud.google.com/customers/, >> ;D) >> >> I hope you can show as many of your app technology and business details >> as possible. >> For example but not limited to the followings: >> 1. what language do you use (python/java/go, ect). ? >> 2. do you use the BigTable datastore heavily or lightly or never use it? >> (number of writes/reads Operations per day) >> 3. how many frontend and backend instances needed for you app? What are >> the types of these instances (F1/F2/F4/B1/B2/B4, etc.)? >> 4. how many active users per day of your client app, or pageviews per >> day of your website app? And bandwidth per day? >> 5. what is cost of your app every day? Do you care about the cost? >> 6. what is revenue of your app every day? Do you care about the revenue? >> 7. are you using other platforms along with GAE? What is the percentage >> of them from cost view (or any other views)? >> 8. is your GAE experience happy? Do you think GAE, comparing to other >> platforms such as Heroku, EC2 and VPS, will help you make more profit or >> not? (if you don't care about the profit, do you think GAE help you much >> comparing other platforms) >> >> Hope the mods can make this thread sticky. >> > -- 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 Saturday, February 22, 2014 5:32:07 AM UTC+8, Mahron wrote: > > I think app engine pricing is pretty fair. The money you may save by > managing custom servers you will soon loose with time and health which are > both priceless (if you do it yourself that is). > Yes, I also really think GAE is great platform to test and debug your apps at development stage by using the free hours. But I never think it is cost effective when your app becomes large. > > I recently launched the app engine app I was working on (www.xehon.com). > Its a pay as you go CMS. So the app actually computes the exact cost of the > requests and storage(datastore and blobstore), and unless you do heavy > video and file downloading it is really cheap. An new account comes with 5$ > credit which is more or less 1$ of app engine usage cost. Even with heavy > usage it would take weeks to burn if off. I guess in the end it all depends > on your business model. > > As for downtime or internal server error, I have rarely experienced it. So > I am pretty satisfied with GAE. For now :p > -- 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 Saturday, February 22, 2014 10:29:11 AM UTC+8, timh wrote: > > Hi > > Even at $5 a day it is cheap, so lets work with that nice round number. > There is no other infrastructure cost, there are no devops support people > involved. > > So I have been looking at other PAAS, (not interested in anything less > thant that) if nothing else than to broaden my understanding of what is > out there. > > Heroku, (just to add auto scaling which it doesn't have out of the box, so > you need adept-scale (min $18 per month) or HireFire ($10) on top of what > you your paying to Heroku. > > Openshift does have autoscaling, so you are up for $20 per month, plus > usage costs for 3 small gears. So this might be cheaper, but I haven't run > anything on it yet to know. > > There are others obviously but a lot don't seem to provide auto scaling. > > The App I talked about has a very peaky use, no one uses it over the > weekend, big peaks in the morning and afternoon. It's an evidence tracking > systems (evidence of work/course material done) and has to be used. There > are millions of entities in the datastore and growing. It is a big python > application with full role based access control. There is audit trail > records created for everything performed in the system. > > A large part of the system uses AJAX, and it is not really a multipage > application, so pageviews are somewhat meaningless form of measurement. > > There historically has been some unreliability and since moving off M/S to > HRD that's pretty well gone away. > > Any way you cut it $5 a day is a reasonable price for an application that > is not relying on advertising for it's revenue. > Hi, man, please post more details in this thread, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/google-appengine/lFxW7NR2gtQ, ok? All you above said has nothing related to proving GAE is cheap or not! Before you post the details, all your million words is meaningless at all for prove GAE is cheap or not! Is it difficult to do this? > > Just my 2c worth > > T > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:54:54 AM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >>> >> >> 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? >> >> costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? >> If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? >> >> $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! >> >> >> >>> >>> 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Hi Even at $5 a day it is cheap, so lets work with that nice round number. There is no other infrastructure cost, there are no devops support people involved. So I have been looking at other PAAS, (not interested in anything less thant that) if nothing else than to broaden my understanding of what is out there. Heroku, (just to add auto scaling which it doesn't have out of the box, so you need adept-scale (min $18 per month) or HireFire ($10) on top of what you your paying to Heroku. Openshift does have autoscaling, so you are up for $20 per month, plus usage costs for 3 small gears. So this might be cheaper, but I haven't run anything on it yet to know. There are others obviously but a lot don't seem to provide auto scaling. The App I talked about has a very peaky use, no one uses it over the weekend, big peaks in the morning and afternoon. It's an evidence tracking systems (evidence of work/course material done) and has to be used. There are millions of entities in the datastore and growing. It is a big python application with full role based access control. There is audit trail records created for everything performed in the system. A large part of the system uses AJAX, and it is not really a multipage application, so pageviews are somewhat meaningless form of measurement. There historically has been some unreliability and since moving off M/S to HRD that's pretty well gone away. Any way you cut it $5 a day is a reasonable price for an application that is not relying on advertising for it's revenue. Just my 2c worth T On Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:54:54 AM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >> > > 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? > > costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? > If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? > > $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! > > > >> >> But no point trying to stick a square peg in a round whole. If you data >> model, or processing requirements don't suit appengine and you can't start >> instances quickly then >> you may well be on the wrong platform. >> >> Now more than my 2c worth ;-) >> >> T >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
I think app engine pricing is pretty fair. The money you may save by managing custom servers you will soon loose with time and health which are both priceless (if you do it yourself that is). I recently launched the app engine app I was working on (www.xehon.com). Its a pay as you go CMS. So the app actually computes the exact cost of the requests and storage(datastore and blobstore), and unless you do heavy video and file downloading it is really cheap. An new account comes with 5$ credit which is more or less 1$ of app engine usage cost. Even with heavy usage it would take weeks to burn if off. I guess in the end it all depends on your business model. As for downtime or internal server error, I have rarely experienced it. So I am pretty satisfied with GAE. For now :p -- 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 to quickly shoot this argument in the head (and I say this as a GAE aficionado): I would ignore any claims about "geographically dispersed" or "automated failover" in this calculation. The only reason we care about that is because it brings reliability, and GAE has historically not met the level of reliability that organizations want when they start adding requirements like geographic dispersion. So it's really a moot point. Jeff On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Jim 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=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 $5k. Even now, I feel it's too overpriced for >> the performance it's delivering. >> >> thanks >> rafa >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Kaan Soral wrote: >>> >>> I think he gets it much more than you give him credit for >>> >>> Hetzner example, as I interpret it, and think about it myself, is about >>> the price of computing/ram/bandwith, although it's not comparable 1:1, it's >>> important to know how cheap computing and hosting has become over the years, >>> especially in this last 5-10 years >>> >>> It was really interesting to hear about your story Rafael, it was the >>> approximate reason why I started this discussion, to learn and speculate >>> about major services >>> >>> The 2000$ 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 cou
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:42:37 AM UTC+8, Kaan Soral wrote: > > I have an extremely poorly monetized app, it's an almost ancient app of > mine, does millions of operations daily, only a fraction are converted to > page views and only a fraction generates revenue > > Even in my case, it's profitable, the costs are 1/2 instance costs and > > 1/2 datastore read/write + bandwidth costs > > So even though appengine seems comparably expensive, in most of the normal > use cases the costs should be manageable / lower than the income > It would be better if you can provide more details, such as the cost, the revenue, how many requests per day. If you earn $100, you pay google $90, I don't think GAE's price is reasonable. > > One disadvantage I noticed lately (You always see people complaining about > it on these groups) is that the initial costs seem to be high, but as the > traffic increases, the costs doesn't increase proportionally. > So basically, appengine gets cost efficient with increased traffic, seems > logical - so basically you have to excuse the initial daily ~<10$ costs if > you are keeping instances and memcached alive > I see. I think you are right on the ratio of cost/revenue will decrease when the app becomes some larger from a very small scale. But you still haven't proven GAE's instance price is reasonable. I need the detailed numbers of some success stories. > > On the alternative side, the side you compare appengine too, if you were > to keep virtual instances or a big dedicated server alive, you would also > pay a similar amount daily/monthly > I always have some VPS servers running, either using App Engine or not. These VPS servers are not filly used. These VPS severs are much powerful than GAE F1 and B1 instances but much cheaper. > > I would suggest you not obsessing over the costs excessively, from > experience, it only makes you lose time and energy, use that time and > energy to monetize what you are doing and reduce the costs by optimizing > your app > In fact, I don't very care about the current cost. I just worry about the future. My app is still in development stage. I must consider the case of possible later large traffic. > > ( Let me also drop one naive example here, let's say you are doing 50 RPC > calls with a naive php/vps setup, those calls would take up 50X time, > however using appengine naively, you can do that 50 RPC calls > asynchronously, it would only take 1x time, and you would pay 1X time, > appengine would be cheaper, it beats up your 46x thread :) ) > ? not very understand this. Do you mean using 50 GAE instances to handle the 50 RPC calls at the same time? The cost would be 50 x 15 minutes! :) > > On Friday, February 21, 2014 7:58:16 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, February 22, 2014 1:10:09 AM UTC+8, Kaan Soral wrote: >>> >>> Tapir, out of curiosity, are you a form of an improved internet troll >>> sent from the future to troll these groups? (Just kidding) >>> >>> Anyway, if those 2000 users pay 49$/month, for example, and the daily >>> costs are only 5$, it would be extremely cost effective, you also have no >>> idea what the app does for that 2000 users, might be a lot of stuff >>> >> >> :) I am just curious how SnapChat can profit with App Engine's so high >> instance price. So I google "snapchat app engine", then google shows me >> this thread. >> I still haven't found any detail specifications provided by SnapChat's >> owner company. >> >> Your example is very extreme. I'm curious how many pageviews and >> revenue of timh's website. This is important for evaluate if App Engine's >> instance price is high or not. >> >> >>> >>> On Friday, February 21, 2014 6:54:54 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. > 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! > >
[google-appengine] Setting com.cn as a serving domain for Google App Engine application via Google Apps?
Hello, I've just tried to set a .com.cn domain name via Google Apps as a serving domain, but failed: "Google Apps does not currently support domains in this country" (it's already registered -- I just wanted to map it) Any experience? Any workaround? LIke setting up a proxy via Amazon? Whatever? Anyhow? Thank you, Balazs -- 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] Min Pending Latency -- does it really do anything?
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:22:56 AM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote: > > The scheduler logic doesn't make any sense for java apps. For frontend > serving I would rather just use a scheduler that boots one instance at time > and would spread traffic linearly through all instances. This would be more > reliable due to the issues with warm up. > > I have to keep 6 useless instances running, just because when a instance > is idle for a long time its very probable its in a zombie state, so even if > you are paying high costs for resident instances there's a high probability > it won't be able to serve requests when you need it. > > The real and only problem is that we are stuck into this senseless > scheduler due to the fact that its the only one who have discounted hours. > It almost seems that google uses the resident instances to serve other > traffic when they become idle (even if I'm paying for it) > I want the scheduler always use the only resident instance to handle requests. :) Yes, we need more settings for the scheduler to define the beviour of the scheduler. Otherwise, it make you feel your fate is controlled by scheduler instead of yourself. :D > On Feb 21, 2014 12:47 AM, "Tapir" > wrote: > >> >> >> On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir wrote: >>> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right? And for the 15 minutes tax design, the "a little more than 4 hours" is about several minutes in fact, right? Ok, I see why one hour compute hour is enough for my app but my app is still often counted more than 28 hours now. So you help me confirm again using Java >>> >>> >>> >>> The 15 minute rule is not confined only to the Java runtime, it exists >>> for all runtimes. It's not a tax; it's there so you avoid the overhead of a >>> second warmup request if another request comes in soon after the first. >>> >> >> I really admire the design of GAE instance scheduler and billing. >> According what you say, at an extreme case >> 1. to avoid warmup request, a resident instance is created, >> 2. the website get a request every 15 minutes, 96 request a day. >> So the scheduler doesn't like let the resident instance to handle the >> requests and let another dynamic instance to handler the requests. >> By what you say above, the total counted hours for the dynamic instance >> is 24 hours! >> The total front end hours is 24 dynamic instance hours + 24 resident >> instance hours = 48 hours! >> So cool! The cooler thing is someone like it and think it is great! >> >> >>> >>> If you wanted to avoid keeping instances up for the extra 15 minutes, >>> you could always cause the instance to terminate; for example, exceed the >>> memory allocated to your instance. >>> >>> >>> - >>> -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-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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
I have an extremely poorly monetized app, it's an almost ancient app of mine, does millions of operations daily, only a fraction are converted to page views and only a fraction generates revenue Even in my case, it's profitable, the costs are 1/2 instance costs and > 1/2 datastore read/write + bandwidth costs So even though appengine seems comparably expensive, in most of the normal use cases the costs should be manageable / lower than the income One disadvantage I noticed lately (You always see people complaining about it on these groups) is that the initial costs seem to be high, but as the traffic increases, the costs doesn't increase proportionally. So basically, appengine gets cost efficient with increased traffic, seems logical - so basically you have to excuse the initial daily ~<10$ costs if you are keeping instances and memcached alive On the alternative side, the side you compare appengine too, if you were to keep virtual instances or a big dedicated server alive, you would also pay a similar amount daily/monthly I would suggest you not obsessing over the costs excessively, from experience, it only makes you lose time and energy, use that time and energy to monetize what you are doing and reduce the costs by optimizing your app ( Let me also drop one naive example here, let's say you are doing 50 RPC calls with a naive php/vps setup, those calls would take up 50X time, however using appengine naively, you can do that 50 RPC calls asynchronously, it would only take 1x time, and you would pay 1X time, appengine would be cheaper, it beats up your 46x thread :) ) On Friday, February 21, 2014 7:58:16 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: > > > > On Saturday, February 22, 2014 1:10:09 AM UTC+8, Kaan Soral wrote: >> >> Tapir, out of curiosity, are you a form of an improved internet troll >> sent from the future to troll these groups? (Just kidding) >> >> Anyway, if those 2000 users pay 49$/month, for example, and the daily >> costs are only 5$, it would be extremely cost effective, you also have no >> idea what the app does for that 2000 users, might be a lot of stuff >> > > :) I am just curious how SnapChat can profit with App Engine's so high > instance price. So I google "snapchat app engine", then google shows me > this thread. > I still haven't found any detail specifications provided by SnapChat's > owner company. > > Your example is very extreme. I'm curious how many pageviews and > revenue of timh's website. This is important for evaluate if App Engine's > instance price is high or not. > > >> >> On Friday, February 21, 2014 6:54:54 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >>> >>> 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? >>> >>> costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? >>> If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? >>> >>> $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! >>> >>> >>> 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Min Pending Latency -- does it really do anything?
The scheduler logic doesn't make any sense for java apps. For frontend serving I would rather just use a scheduler that boots one instance at time and would spread traffic linearly through all instances. This would be more reliable due to the issues with warm up. I have to keep 6 useless instances running, just because when a instance is idle for a long time its very probable its in a zombie state, so even if you are paying high costs for resident instances there's a high probability it won't be able to serve requests when you need it. The real and only problem is that we are stuck into this senseless scheduler due to the fact that its the only one who have discounted hours. It almost seems that google uses the resident instances to serve other traffic when they become idle (even if I'm paying for it) On Feb 21, 2014 12:47 AM, "Tapir" wrote: > > > On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir wrote: >> >>> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, >>> the real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right? >>> And for the 15 minutes tax design, the "a little more than 4 hours" is >>> about several minutes in fact, right? >>> >>> Ok, I see why one hour compute hour is enough for my app but my app is >>> still often counted more than 28 hours now. >>> So you help me confirm again using Java >>> >> >> >> >> The 15 minute rule is not confined only to the Java runtime, it exists >> for all runtimes. It's not a tax; it's there so you avoid the overhead of a >> second warmup request if another request comes in soon after the first. >> > > I really admire the design of GAE instance scheduler and billing. > According what you say, at an extreme case > 1. to avoid warmup request, a resident instance is created, > 2. the website get a request every 15 minutes, 96 request a day. > So the scheduler doesn't like let the resident instance to handle the > requests and let another dynamic instance to handler the requests. > By what you say above, the total counted hours for the dynamic instance is > 24 hours! > The total front end hours is 24 dynamic instance hours + 24 resident > instance hours = 48 hours! > So cool! The cooler thing is someone like it and think it is great! > > >> >> If you wanted to avoid keeping instances up for the extra 15 minutes, you >> could always cause the instance to terminate; for example, exceed the >> memory allocated to your instance. >> >> >> - >> -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. > -- 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 Saturday, February 22, 2014 1:10:09 AM UTC+8, Kaan Soral wrote: > > Tapir, out of curiosity, are you a form of an improved internet troll sent > from the future to troll these groups? (Just kidding) > > Anyway, if those 2000 users pay 49$/month, for example, and the daily > costs are only 5$, it would be extremely cost effective, you also have no > idea what the app does for that 2000 users, might be a lot of stuff > :) I am just curious how SnapChat can profit with App Engine's so high instance price. So I google "snapchat app engine", then google shows me this thread. I still haven't found any detail specifications provided by SnapChat's owner company. Your example is very extreme. I'm curious how many pageviews and revenue of timh's website. This is important for evaluate if App Engine's instance price is high or not. > > On Friday, February 21, 2014 6:54:54 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >>> >> >> 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? >> >> costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? >> If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? >> >> $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! >> >> >> >>> >>> But no point trying to stick a square peg in a round whole. If you data >>> model, or processing requirements don't suit appengine and you can't start >>> instances quickly then >>> you may well be on the wrong platform. >>> >>> Now more than my 2c worth ;-) >>> >>> T >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 1:10:09 AM UTC+8, Kaan Soral wrote: > > Tapir, out of curiosity, are you a form of an improved internet troll sent > from the future to troll these groups? (Just kidding) > > Anyway, if those 2000 users pay 49$/month, for example, and the daily > costs are only 5$, it would be extremely cost effective, you also have no > idea what the app does for that 2000 users, might be a lot of stuff > :) I a just curious how SnapChat can profit with App Engine's so high price. So I google "snapchat app engine", then google shows me this thread. I still haven't found any detail specifications provided by Sna[Chat's owner company. Your example is very extreme. I'm curious how many pageviews and revenue of timh's website. This is important for evaluate if App Engine's instance price is high or not. > > On Friday, February 21, 2014 6:54:54 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >>> >> >> 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? >> >> costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? >> If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? >> >> $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! >> >> >> >>> >>> But no point trying to stick a square peg in a round whole. If you data >>> model, or processing requirements don't suit appengine and you can't start >>> instances quickly then >>> you may well be on the wrong platform. >>> >>> Now more than my 2c worth ;-) >>> >>> T >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
Tapir, out of curiosity, are you a form of an improved internet troll sent from the future to troll these groups? (Just kidding) Anyway, if those 2000 users pay 49$/month, for example, and the daily costs are only 5$, it would be extremely cost effective, you also have no idea what the app does for that 2000 users, might be a lot of stuff On Friday, February 21, 2014 6:54:54 PM UTC+2, Tapir wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. >> > > 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? > > costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? > If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? > > $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! > > > >> >> 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
On Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:52:40 PM UTC+8, timh 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. > 2000 users? how many pageviews per day? costs only $2-$3 a day? Only? If there is no the free hours, it would be $5, right? $5 per day for 2000 users? and it is cost effective? Really!!! > > 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: Ok, I want to create this thread for a long time. --- Please share your GAE success stories!
Hi, your story doesn't need to be a success. Just descript your App Engine experience here from the technology and business view. On Friday, February 21, 2014 1:28:05 PM UTC+8, Tapir wrote: > When you share you story, please DON'T just say "I happy with GAE, bla bla > bla ..." without any technology and business details. > (for example, the pdf ones listed at https://cloud.google.com/customers/, > ;D) > > I hope you can show as many of your app technology and business details as > possible. > For example but not limited to the followings: > 1. what language do you use (python/java/go, ect). ? > 2. do you use the BigTable datastore heavily or lightly or never use it? > (number of writes/reads Operations per day) > 3. how many frontend and backend instances needed for you app? What are > the types of these instances (F1/F2/F4/B1/B2/B4, etc.)? > 4. how many active users per day of your client app, or pageviews per > day of your website app? And bandwidth per day? > 5. what is cost of your app every day? Do you care about the cost? > 6. what is revenue of your app every day? Do you care about the revenue? > 7. are you using other platforms along with GAE? What is the percentage of > them from cost view (or any other views)? > 8. is your GAE experience happy? Do you think GAE, comparing to other > platforms such as Heroku, EC2 and VPS, will help you make more profit or > not? (if you don't care about the profit, do you think GAE help you much > comparing other platforms) > > Hope the mods can make this thread sticky. > -- 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: Task Queue | Python | Returns 500 on first attempt and 200 on second attempt
Yeah, you will want to drill down on that and figure where it is failing. If this consistently happens, the problem is most likely not taskqueue related. On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 4:52:53 AM UTC-6, Rohan Malhotra wrote: > > Hi, > > I am trying to send a mail via mandrill using GAE tasks. On first attempt > task fails with a 500 error and I get an error that *Task failed to > execute. This task will retry in 100.000 seconds. *On second attempt, 200 > response is received and task completes. In both attempts mail is sent > successfully. Here is code snippet. In both attempts, result.status_code is > 200. > > result = urlfetch.fetch(url=, > method=urlfetch.POST, > deadline=60, > payload=json.dumps(mail_params)) > if result.status_code == 200: ># using python flask response 200 >return "", 200 > > > > Any pointers? > > Thanks > -- 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] Replication local MySQL to Google Cloud SQL
Hello all, I would like to setup Master-Slave replication with Clould SQL to backup our in-premises databases. Am I right in thinking that Master-Slave replication needs the SUPER privilege which isn't available in Cloud SQL thus it cannot serve as SLAVE? Peter -- 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] Problem: index not created
Hi Vinny,
Thanks for help.
i) I used the log error suggest for the datastore-indexes.xml. See log
error:
start log error ---
javax.servlet.ServletContext log: Exception while dispatching incoming RPC call
com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.SerializationException: Type
'com.google.appengine.api.datastore.DatastoreNeedIndexException' was not
included in the set of types which can be serialized by this
SerializationPolicy or its Class object could not be loaded. For security
purposes, this type will not be serialized.: instance =
com.google.appengine.api.datastore.DatastoreNeedIndexException: no matching
index found.
The suggested index for this query is:
(...)
- end log error
ii) This is my query. In reality it is a method with parameters. I replaced
the variables by fixed content.
--- start query
Query query = new Query("ItemGroupOptionalQuantities");
query.setAncestor(ancestorKey);
query.addSort("quantityFrom", Query.SortDirection.ASCENDING)
PreparedQuery preparedQuery = datastore.prepare(query);
FetchOptions fetchOptions = FetchOptions.Builder.withLimit(10);
QueryResultList entities
= preparedQuery.asQueryResultList(fetchOptions);
--- end query ---
iii) other information: When I deploy, this index entry was in
datastore-indexes-auto.xml too, with source="auto". By rule, the index
should have been generated.
iv) quantityFrom is a Double type. Can do an index from a double type?
Thanks Vinny.
Em sexta-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2014 03h59min45s UTC-3, Vinny P escreveu:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:53 AM, David >
> wrote:
>
>> I inserted a new index in the datastore-indexes.xml, as below:
>> > source="manual">
>>
>>
>> It doesn't work. I'm getting a msg "DatastoreNeedIndexException: no
>> matching index found."
>>
>
>
>
> Generally that means the query you're attempting doesn't match the indexes
> you've specified in datastore-indexes.xml. Can you post the code for your
> query?
>
> Alternately you can try updating only the datastore indexes by calling
> appcfg update_indexes. Here's the documentation:
> https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/java/tools/uploadinganapp#Updating_Indexes
>
>
>
> -
> -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] not allowed to create anymore apps;reached app creation limit?
Try disabling any already migrated M/S apps. disabled apps dont cont towards quota. Or might be able to temporally enable paid status on one app to free up a slot. On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:55 AM, HityHoo wrote: > > When I tried to migrate my gae apps to HRD, I got a message 'not allowed > to create anymore apps;reached app creation limit?', I have used all my 10 > free apps, now what can I do? > > -- > 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] not allowed to create anymore apps;reached app creation limit?
When I tried to migrate my gae apps to HRD, I got a message 'not allowed to create anymore apps;reached app creation limit?', I have used all my 10 free apps, now what can I do? -- 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] Min Pending Latency -- does it really do anything?
On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir > > wrote: > >> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the >> real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right? >> And for the 15 minutes tax design, the "a little more than 4 hours" is >> about several minutes in fact, right? >> >> Ok, I see why one hour compute hour is enough for my app but my app is >> still often counted more than 28 hours now. >> So you help me confirm again using Java >> > > > > The 15 minute rule is not confined only to the Java runtime, it exists for > all runtimes. It's not a tax; it's there so you avoid the overhead of a > second warmup request if another request comes in soon after the first. > I really admire the design of GAE instance scheduler and billing. According what you say, at an extreme case 1. to avoid warmup request, a resident instance is created, 2. the website get a request every 15 minutes, 96 request a day. So the scheduler doesn't like let the resident instance to handle the requests and let another dynamic instance to handler the requests. By what you say above, the total counted hours for the dynamic instance is 24 hours! The total front end hours is 24 dynamic instance hours + 24 resident instance hours = 48 hours! So cool! The cooler thing is someone like it and think it is great! > > If you wanted to avoid keeping instances up for the extra 15 minutes, you > could always cause the instance to terminate; for example, exceed the > memory allocated to your instance. > > > - > -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] Min Pending Latency -- does it really do anything?
On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir > > wrote: > >> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the >> real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right? >> And for the 15 minutes tax design, the "a little more than 4 hours" is >> about several minutes in fact, right? >> >> Ok, I see why one hour compute hour is enough for my app but my app is >> still often counted more than 28 hours now. >> So you help me confirm again using Java >> > > > > The 15 minute rule is not confined only to the Java runtime, it exists for > all runtimes. It's not a tax; it's there so you avoid the overhead of a > second warmup request if another request comes in soon after the first. > I really admire the design of GAE instance scheduler and billing. According what you say, at an extreme case 1. to avoid warmup request, a resident instance is created, 2. the website get a request every 15 minutes, 96 request a day. So the scheduler doesn't like let the resident instance to handle the requests and let another dynamic instance to handler the requests. By what you say above, the total counted hours for the dynamic instance is 24 hours! The total front end hours is 24 dynamic instance hours + 24 resident instance hours = 48 hours! So cool! The cooler thing is someone like it and think it is great! > > If you wanted to avoid keeping instances up for the extra 15 minutes, you > could always cause the instance to terminate; for example, exceed the > memory allocated to your instance. > > > - > -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.
