[google-appengine] Re: Memcache doesn't work
1. If you absolutely have to have all 6,500 city names for each user session, I would put them in a separate JavaScript file, stick a reference to it at the bottom of your app page, and host this file somewhere outside of GAE to save a bit of money. This file will be cached by browsers, so that returning visitors most likely won't have to load it again. 2. Now, I very much doubt that your users click/browse/view more than a dozen cities during their visit. I cannot come up with any use case why you need to load all 6,500 names for each visitor. Users will never look at more than 50 records. If you need to load/display more than 50 city names at a time, you have the wrong data model or bad app design. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Feature Request I Think....
Allowing several apps to talk to the same Datastore may be a good idea in its own right, but it would the wrong way to look at this issue. Most apps combine slow and fast requests in a way that makes them hard to separate. If I can specify that requests A, B and C go to "instance type 1", and request D goes to "instance type 2", then I can expect significant performance improvements by being able to fine-tune each type of front-end instances. I would love to be able to set different rules for each type as I know when my users expect an immediate response and when a few seconds delay is not a problem. We already take advantage of the two tiers of instances: frontend and backend. This idea takes it one step further by creating custom frontend instance types. While you are at it, maybe you can get rid of these artificial monikers of "frontend" and "backend" instances, and have a single implementation that lets us define our own instance types based on 3-4 criteria. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Internal Server 500 error when transitioning to a newer version of code with logged in users
Simon is correct - any changes in any data entity that is passed between the datastore and the client will cause this problem. And it's not just the login issue. An application may be updated when a user is already logged in and using the application. The next call to the server may fail if it involves an object that fails to deserialize. Our solution was to raise a NewVersionException when we detect a call from an old client. We make this determination before we process the request, so we avoid running into a server error. When this exception reaches the client, we inform the user that a new version of the app is available, and ask them to reload the page. You don't need to add a version number to the User model. We store client version number in a session attribute. Then we compare it to SystemProperty. applicationVersion.get(). Andrei Volgin www.spiraluniverse.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
[google-appengine] Re: “Server Error” after a few hours idle when using AppEngine OpenID login
I see the same error from time to time when a user clicks on a link to get Google account OpenId authentication. Nothing in the server logs. (I am not using any plugins) Is this an App Engine issue or a Google account issue? On Saturday, May 25, 2013 3:41:26 PM UTC-4, Graeme Pyle wrote: > > Whenever my GAE app has been idle for a while, the first login (sometimes > the first few) fails with this error: -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Snapchat
App Engine is very cheap for startups. I would even say it's a game-changer. I built two startups before PaaS became an option, and I can say with certainty that App Engine would have saved me millions of dollars each time. Most new applications can happily live within a free quota until they prove to be useful for a significant number of users. A well-built app will have a to serve a whole lot of users before it costs more than $200 per day on App Engine, and that's still cheaper than a single systems engineer or a DBA. I think that App Engine is difficult and expensive for less-experienced or less-qualified developers. Sloppy data models, unnecessary indexes, overly complex queries, unintended dependencies, large third-party libraries for simple tasks, wrong headers on static resources - these mistakes are not always noticeable when you run your own box, given how cheap and powerful the servers are these days. With App Engine these mistakes add up very quickly. On the other hand, App Engine gives you all the information you need to analyze your bill. Once you see that a certain item becomes significant, there are ways to optimize your application in order to reduce costs. I certainly advocate avoiding basic mistakes from day one, but there are certain optimizations that make sense only when volume picks up. For example, you can move a backend task to a Compute Engine instance, which is many times cheaper, but requires more work to set up and manage. Or you can split a complex data entity into two separate entities so that a minor change will not result in multiple datastore writes. Or you can unindex some properties and iterate through query results, saving on writes and data volume. Or you can set the correct chunk size on your queries - something that many developers probably forget to do. And so on. I am working on an app now that loads, processes and indexes 1 million web pages and creates app. 10 million datastore entities for less than $100 in App Engine costs. I don't know what your application does for your users, but that's a whole lot of processing power for a hundred bucks. Once we hit a million users or so, we will move some of our processing load to the Compute Engine, but the effort does not make economic sense before that. -- 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: Google App Engine Project vs. Application and sharing data in storage
Use versions for QA. You deploy a new version to GAE, but you don't make it a default version until the QA is done. Just remember to create a special user account (or whatever your app uses) for QA so they don't mess up other users' data. Also, if you make a new version the default one (after the QA), and some problems sneak in, you can quickly revert to the previous version (make it default - in takes seconds), and continue to work on the new one. -- 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: If I run an application on the appengine from outside of US, what country's laws determines whether an app is legal?
This is a very complex issue, and there is no universal answer. I had to deal with it several times. For example, if a book is in the public domain in one country and still under the copyright in another, you may be liable in that country if you allow a user from that country to download it. In practice, however, it is extremely rare that anyone tries to enforce such laws. I would recommend that you comply with both the U.S. and Canadian laws, since you may be deemed to have a physical presence (nexus) in both countries. As a minimum, you may ask your users to certify, when they sign up, which country they are from and that they are not aware of any laws that prevent them from using your service. I don't think there is any law that actually requires you to verify their representations, but you may want to consult with an attorney about that. -- 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: Java example on how to upload csv data to the data store
If you want to convert CSV data into entities, you may use http://sourceforge.net/projects/opencsv/ to process your CVS file. -- 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] A comparison between Digital Ocean $5 plan and App Engine B$ instance type.
@Tapir Move your app to Compute Engine and stop complaining. You can still use the Datastore, but your instance will cost you much less. -- 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: Startup time exceeded...on F4?!
I have a large GWT app with over 50 complex data entities with very complicated relationships between them. There are over 100 RPC methods, and I use various GAE services (Users, Memcache, Blobstore, Images, and Mail). My new instance startup time ranges from 4 to 5 sec on F1. Sometimes it goes a little higher. The lowest was 3.6 sec. I use the low-level API and no DI. Productivity tools are nice, but they have their cost. In any case, if Jeff's suggestion is implemented (dispatch only to warm instances), it would not matter if the start up time is 4 sec or 40. I followed this discussion closely, and to me it is obvious that the existing GAE mechanism is inferior to what Jeff is proposing (for any number of instances). There may be a good technical reason why the GAE team chose their current implementation. It is also possible that GAE was built by engineers who did not think in terms of web user experience, and who believed that a rare 30 seconds delay is the acceptable price to pay for some other benefits of the current implementation. This proposal was already starred by many people (issue 7865). It would be nice if the GAE teams takes another look and tells us whether we should expect any changes. I am sure a lot of app developers would like to know whether they should optimize for fast cold starts. These optimizations are expensive (both in direct development time and in lost productivity), so this is not an idle question. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/VsYwv3Sf52wJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: 10mb deploy size limit
Phil, > > Your record shows that you exceeded 1GB limit (1073741824 bytes), not 10MB. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/_1QJBWIITmoJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: What are the pros and cons of using Google App engine for my startup?
Pros: You don't need your own servers. You don't need system admins. You don't need database admins. You don't worry about replication and backups. Many useful built-in services (Users, Blobstore, etc.) Appengine is free until your traffic picks up. Seamless (almost) deployment of new versions. Cons: None. Some people believe that Appengine has certain shortcomings. Some services can be a bit pricey. None of this matters to you. If your startup becomes a huge success, you can always look at your Appengine bill and optimize parts of your service, or move some services (e.g. email, file storage) to other platforms. Appengine is the ideal platform for startups. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/pV_fhfS9bIwJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Error on Conversion API: NPE when instantiating ConversionResult object
I was just informed that the Conversion API will be discontinued in November of this year. I guess, it's time to look for an alternative solution. Too bad, I think it's a very useful API. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/fxtsGz_uaMQJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
[google-appengine] Re: Search service - pricing
Just to clarify: for 1.2 euros you get 100,000 searches, not 1,000. "Savaş L." Oct 04 04:24AM -0700 0.0012 cent per look up makes 1.2 dollar for 1000 searches.. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/CKEpMrweEMcJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: European hosted apps - when will $500 fee be lifted?
People who want total lock down should not use the Internet. Period. Safe Harbor works for us too. Most customers in Europe are reasonable people. On Thursday, October 11, 2012 7:34:02 AM UTC-4, alex wrote: > > Besides, what happens in reality (at > least, in my experience) is that people and orgs that want a total > data lock down in EU won't use your app/service having the above > definition anyway. So, I'm pretty much happy with the Safe Harbor. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/F66wMZ4YkP0J. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Splitting Client and Server side in 2 AppEngines to keep server side code confidential
The right approach is to expose an API that your partners can use to build their own apps to communicate with your server/data layer. You can also open-source your client, or create a client library for building a client app. If you open your client, it will have to talk to your servers using the same API that you expose to your partners. If you open the client-side library, your own client may remain closed and use RPC, while the open client library will use the API. Andrei Volgin On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 6:09:43 PM UTC-5, Ben wrote: > > Thus the idea to split our application into two App Engine applications .. > one in control of the partnering company and one in our control .. Of > course the problem is that those 2 need to communicate .. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/kiBvQw5oWnoJ. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Re: [google-appengine] Final opportunity to try the beta Google Cloud Platform console before its release
Patrice, In the Datastore/Query panel, please, do not load the first entity kind by default. The probability that a user wants to see exactly the first 50 entities of exactly the first entity kind on _every_ visit is extremely low, so there is no need to make a user wait every time until these entities load in the view. It's a small thing. Otherwise, I am getting used to the new console and start enjoying it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/a9b9b5b3-21f2-4f9c-a19a-997196201608%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[google-appengine] Updates to managed VMs stopped working
Starting from last night updates to modules using managed VMs started to fail for my project (id="filemambo"). appcfg update now results in java.lang.RuntimeException: Fatal problem encountered during deployment. Please refer to the logs for more information. at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.isServing( AppVersionUpload.java:1096) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.access$200( AppVersionUpload.java:46) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call( AppVersionUpload.java:929) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call( AppVersionUpload.java:926) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call( AppVersionUpload.java:1233) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call( AppVersionUpload.java:1230) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload. retryWithBackoffOptional(AppVersionUpload.java:1270) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoff (AppVersionUpload.java:1228) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.commit( AppVersionUpload.java:926) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload. uploadFilesTransaction(AppVersionUpload.java:228) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.doUpload( AppVersionUpload.java:200) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate( AppAdminImpl.java:571) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.update(AppAdminImpl. java:58) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg$UpdateAction.execute( AppCfg.java:1537) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.executeAction(AppCfg.java: 360) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:222) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:127) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.main(AppCfg.java:123) com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AdminException: Unable to update app: Fatal problem encountered during deployment. Please refer to the logs for more information. at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate( AppAdminImpl.java:577) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.update(AppAdminImpl. java:58) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg$UpdateAction.execute( AppCfg.java:1537) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.executeAction(AppCfg.java: 360) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:222) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:127) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.main(AppCfg.java:123) Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Fatal problem encountered during deployment. Please refer to the logs for more information. at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.isServing( AppVersionUpload.java:1096) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.access$200( AppVersionUpload.java:46) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call( AppVersionUpload.java:929) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call( AppVersionUpload.java:926) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call( AppVersionUpload.java:1233) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call( AppVersionUpload.java:1230) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload. retryWithBackoffOptional(AppVersionUpload.java:1270) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoff (AppVersionUpload.java:1228) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.commit( AppVersionUpload.java:926) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload. uploadFilesTransaction(AppVersionUpload.java:228) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.doUpload( AppVersionUpload.java:200) at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate( AppAdminImpl.java:571) ... 6 more I see that a managed VM instance is killed, a new instance is created, but this new instance has 0 bytes in memory and is not working (503 error: "The service you requested is not available yet). There have been no changes in project structure, setup, etc. I noticed that this problem started exactly when the error message from deploys (about outdated SDK) disappeared. I upgraded to 1.9.31, but it did not help. gcloud preview app deploy does not work either - it results in "Timed out when starting VMs. Rolling back the update." I tried deploying module as a new version, deleting it completely and redeploying, etc. Any ideas how to resolve this? -- 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. V
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Updates to managed VMs stopped working
1. I tried to redeploy all modules. The default is App Engine instances,
and it works fine. The backend module is managed VMs, and it refuses to
deploy. It worked yesterday.
2. When I try to deploy (gcloud preview app deploy), I get an error
message, including , but I do see the age-builder instance for a while
("gae-builder-vm-1d", where 1d is module version). Then I see a vm
instance, like "gae-backend-1d-xxoc". It spins for a long time, and finally
turns green. It still shows 503 "The service you requested is not available
yet." when I try to access it from the client.
Andrei
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Adam (Cloud Platform Support) <
araf...@google.com> wrote:
>
> Does this happen for non-default modules or the default module? If
non-default, have you tried re-deploying the default module to a new
version as well? Under 'Compute Engine' -> VM instances, do you see many
'gae-*' instances in an unhealthy state (including any gae-builder
instances)?
>
> On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 4:41:15 PM UTC-5, Andrei Volgin wrote:
>>
>> Starting from last night updates to modules using managed VMs started to
fail for my project (id="filemambo"). appcfg update now results in
>>
>>
>> java.lang.RuntimeException: Fatal problem encountered during deployment.
Please refer to the logs for more information.
>>
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.isServing(AppVersionUpload.java:1096)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.access$200(AppVersionUpload.java:46)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:929)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:926)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call(AppVersionUpload.java:1233)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call(AppVersionUpload.java:1230)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoffOptional(AppVersionUpload.java:1270)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoff(AppVersionUpload.java:1228)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.commit(AppVersionUpload.java:926)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.uploadFilesTransaction(AppVersionUpload.java:228)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.doUpload(AppVersionUpload.java:200)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate(AppAdminImpl.java:571)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.update(AppAdminImpl.java:58)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg$UpdateAction.execute(AppCfg.java:1537)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.executeAction(AppCfg.java:360)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:222)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:127)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.main(AppCfg.java:123)
>>
>>
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AdminException: Unable to update app:
Fatal problem encountered during deployment. Please refer to the logs for
more information.
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate(AppAdminImpl.java:577)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.update(AppAdminImpl.java:58)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg$UpdateAction.execute(AppCfg.java:1537)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.executeAction(AppCfg.java:360)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:222)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.(AppCfg.java:127)
>>
>>at com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppCfg.main(AppCfg.java:123)
>>
>>
>> Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: Fatal problem encountered during
deployment. Please refer to the logs for more information.
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.isServing(AppVersionUpload.java:1096)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.access$200(AppVersionUpload.java:46)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:929)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:926)
>>
>>at
com.google.appengi
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Updates to managed VMs stopped working
I already tried deleting all versions/instances, but it did not help.
Deploying the same code to a completely new project worked. What can be the
cause? Both projects are on the same billing account. The only difference I
can think of as relevant is the SSL resource that I created for compute
engine instances in the project that fails to deploy managed VMs. Maybe the
fact that I tried to deploy CE instances made some changes in the settings,
but I don't see any differences in the console.
Any help is greatly appreciated. We have Gold support for the other
project, and I am #5 on StackOverflow based on the number of answered
questions (477) about App Engine :)
Andrei
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 4:47 PM, Adam (Cloud Platform Support) <
araf...@google.com> wrote:
> The only recommendation I have is to try deleting all versions of Managed
> VM modules from App Engine -> Versions, and also any remaining Managed VM
> instances from Compute Engine -> Instances and trying a redeploy. I don't
> have any reports of known issues with Managed VM deployments at this time
> but I will be sure to keep this thread updated if I do. For troubleshooting
> purposes you might want to try testing deployment to a new project to test
> if the issue is project-local.
>
> On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 8:15:05 PM UTC-5, Andrei Volgin wrote:
>>
>> 1. I tried to redeploy all modules. The default is App Engine instances,
>> and it works fine. The backend module is managed VMs, and it refuses to
>> deploy. It worked yesterday.
>>
>> 2. When I try to deploy (gcloud preview app deploy), I get an error
>> message, including , but I do see the age-builder instance for a while
>> ("gae-builder-vm-1d", where 1d is module version). Then I see a vm
>> instance, like "gae-backend-1d-xxoc". It spins for a long time, and finally
>> turns green. It still shows 503 "The service you requested is not available
>> yet." when I try to access it from the client.
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Adam (Cloud Platform Support) <
>> araf...@google.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Does this happen for non-default modules or the default module? If
>> non-default, have you tried re-deploying the default module to a new
>> version as well? Under 'Compute Engine' -> VM instances, do you see many
>> 'gae-*' instances in an unhealthy state (including any gae-builder
>> instances)?
>> >
>> > On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 4:41:15 PM UTC-5, Andrei Volgin wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Starting from last night updates to modules using managed VMs started
>> to fail for my project (id="filemambo"). appcfg update now results in
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> java.lang.RuntimeException: Fatal problem encountered during
>> deployment. Please refer to the logs for more information.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.isServing(AppVersionUpload.java:1096)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.access$200(AppVersionUpload.java:46)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:929)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$2.call(AppVersionUpload.java:926)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call(AppVersionUpload.java:1233)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload$3.call(AppVersionUpload.java:1230)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoffOptional(AppVersionUpload.java:1270)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.retryWithBackoff(AppVersionUpload.java:1228)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.commit(AppVersionUpload.java:926)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.uploadFilesTransaction(AppVersionUpload.java:228)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppVersionUpload.doUpload(AppVersionUpload.java:200)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.doUpdate(AppAdminImpl.java:571)
>> >>
>> >>at
>> com.google.appengine.tools.admin.AppAdminImpl.update(AppAdminImpl.java:58)
&
[google-appengine] Re: Can Application Settings anyhow guarantee me exactly 2 instances?
Aron, If you need exactly two instances and the cost is of importance, you should consider running your application on two Compute Engine instances that cost many times less than the App Engine instances. You can still access the datastore. -- 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/d/optout.
[google-appengine] Re: Memcache Costs
Richard, Both free and dedicated memcache can disappear at any moment - it happens rarely, but it can happen. The only difference is that with dedicated memcache objects will not be evicted unless you exceed reserved capacity, while with free memcache there is no guaranteed capacity. 20MB is a very small size to worry about. It will be available *almost* always. If *almost* is not good enough for you, then you have to reserve 1GB of memcache. You can always run your app for a few days and see if you get any evictions because of capacity limits. I doubt you will see any. Also, you may consider keeping all 20MB of data in instance memory, which is even faster than memcache and is always guaranteed. The drawback is that each instance will have to load and keep its own copy of this data, and all copies may quickly become out of sync, which may or may not be a problem given your data architecture and requirements. Andrei On Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 12:56:09 PM UTC-4, Richard Cheesmar wrote: > > > George, sorry but I'm still not clear on this. Are you stating that I have > to pay for 1GB per hour even if I only require 20MB? > > If this is true this seems a tad hard as that 1 GB of dedicated memcache > is going to cost in the region of 45 USD per month. When I only require, > at this stage around 20MB of dedicated memcache, if that. Given this I > would be paying for something I'm not using which hardly seems justified. > > Just to be clear here, that 20MB would be permanent so not in and out of > memcache. > > Can I have a definitive answer on this please. > > Thank you. > > > On Friday, March 10, 2017 at 8:26:47 PM UTC+3, Richard Cheesmar wrote: >> >> In the docs regarding costs, dedicated Memcache is priced at 0.06 USD per >> GB an hour. On the price calculator you can specify MB of memcache per >> hour. So are you charged on a Mb basis per hour if you are using say no >> more than 50MB per hour? >> >> >> -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/1cabb3ec-50f1-4ad6-a4ba-faff688dfc38%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
