Re: [google-appengine] Spending LImits Going Away :(

[Luca de Alfaro]

Yes, at least, we can hard limit the number of active instances: see
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/standard/python3/config/appref
So if every active instance has a limited rate of use of backend services
(like datastore), and there are no services accessible except via an
appengine instance (e.g., no GCS direct bandwidth), in practice we can put
a bound using that.

Luca

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 3:45 PM Luca de Alfaro  wrote:

> I concur with the worry.  Is there any _technical_ reason why it is a good
> idea to do away with a spending limit?  Can we get an instance limit
> instead?
> This is suddenly making standard non-scalable systems on AWS look better
> than appengine!
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:03 AM Joshua Smith 
> wrote:
>
>> Once again last night, my wallet was saved when a runaway bot chewed up
>> my site’s whole daily spending limit. I got an email from a user, set up a
>> firewall rule, and goosed my budget to get things going again.
>>
>> I’m *very* concerned about Google’s decision to remove this feature.
>> Offering a cloud service that bills by usage without having a way to limit
>> the spend shifts an unreasonable amount of risk onto the subscriber.
>>
>> I’ve set up budget alerts, as suggested, but I’m concerned that:
>>
>> - What if my bill shoots up really fast? How quickly is this alert going
>> to go out?
>>
>> - What if I am away from the computer (remember when we used to be able
>> to leave our houses? good times… good times…)?
>>
>> I run this particular site as a not-for-profit social good. (It’s a site
>> that small town governments use to post their meetings.) I make *no* money
>> on it.
>>
>> I’d be perfectly happy to handle this with self-set quotas on something
>> other than dollars. For example, in my case the budget-buster is always
>> “Cloud Datastore Read Operations.” If I could set a cap on that one thing,
>> it’d give me the protection I need.
>>
>> -Joshua
>>
>> --
>> 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 view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/FC0F0C74-0D40-48DF-8919-208202A9B1A8%40gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/FC0F0C74-0D40-48DF-8919-208202A9B1A8%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>>
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/CAPgu2u%2BjqXRjMMny-5f%3DNr0OXYXZgi6w_Rm7jwfJDS8B54EixA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [google-appengine] Spending LImits Going Away :(

[Luca de Alfaro]

I concur with the worry.  Is there any _technical_ reason why it is a good
idea to do away with a spending limit?  Can we get an instance limit
instead?
This is suddenly making standard non-scalable systems on AWS look better
than appengine!

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 9:03 AM Joshua Smith 
wrote:

> Once again last night, my wallet was saved when a runaway bot chewed up my
> site’s whole daily spending limit. I got an email from a user, set up a
> firewall rule, and goosed my budget to get things going again.
>
> I’m *very* concerned about Google’s decision to remove this feature.
> Offering a cloud service that bills by usage without having a way to limit
> the spend shifts an unreasonable amount of risk onto the subscriber.
>
> I’ve set up budget alerts, as suggested, but I’m concerned that:
>
> - What if my bill shoots up really fast? How quickly is this alert going
> to go out?
>
> - What if I am away from the computer (remember when we used to be able to
> leave our houses? good times… good times…)?
>
> I run this particular site as a not-for-profit social good. (It’s a site
> that small town governments use to post their meetings.) I make *no* money
> on it.
>
> I’d be perfectly happy to handle this with self-set quotas on something
> other than dollars. For example, in my case the budget-buster is always
> “Cloud Datastore Read Operations.” If I could set a cap on that one thing,
> it’d give me the protection I need.
>
> -Joshua
>
> --
> 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 view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/FC0F0C74-0D40-48DF-8919-208202A9B1A8%40gmail.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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/CAPgu2uLMSxFBrPy%2BrLvGLhWqp2XYBW%2BWtCOqFTtAj7sDhhtCMg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [google-appengine] Diving into App Engine is soooooooooooo hard now - My analysis

[Luca de Alfaro]

I will sorely miss Appengine, as it was a uniquely simple way to get
reliability and scalability.

And it was unique to Google.  Other things, like containers, vms, and
databases, AWS also has them.

So I think the strategy is foolish.  If Appengine is de-emphasized, I won't
be confident putting resources in Firebase, which seems to be just the next
Appengine.  I will move to things that historically have been more stable,
and that means, I am afraid, AWS.
As much as I admire Google's technical skills, for the things I and my
startups do, we need to be able to focus on developing new features rather
than porting what we have from services that are going to be deprecated
periodically.

Luca

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 1:02 PM Joshua Smith 
wrote:

> It’s interesting to look at what Google is doing with Firebase.
>
> 1. They are encouraging us to move more of the processing into the client,
> which while often architecturally foolish, does eliminate the need for some
> of the PaaS stuff.
>
> 2. They have a serverless/cloud functions thing over there, which overlaps
> a lot with the PaaS stuff we’ve been able to do in GAE. I haven’t dug into
> that too much, but on the surface it looks like the spaghetti antipattern.
>
> Given that this is google, and that it’s PaaS all over again, I think the
> risk of putting *any* eggs in the Firebase basket seems almost unbearably
> high. Is Google going to turn their back on Firebase when the next shiny
> object distracts them? Why should we believe that *any* service google
> offers will last more than their committed 3 years?
>
> I’m super tired of having to go back and rewrite my critical business
> infrastructure every few years.
>
> (Google’s competitors in the PaaS space don’t inspire any more confidence,
> so this isn’t so much a google problem as a cloud problem, I think.)
>
> -Joshua
>
> On Mar 20, 2020, at 12:59 PM, Patrice B 
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> A few months back, I had a similar reflexion on current trends regarding
> AppEngine, which I called "the end of paas", which could be called "end of
> serverless" in a way
>
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer#!search/paas|sort:date/google-appengine/DHMMv5r8qjU/A-VO3PXPDwAJ
>
> It's not very long, so I paste it here, since it is quite similar to what
> is being said here.
>
> It seems most of the services that made AppEngine a proper Platorm as a
> Service are now scheduled to be shut down, and users are advised to
> migrate.   Migrate search to ElasticSearch, migrate memcache to Redis, and
> maybe at some point we'll be asked to migrate Ndb to MongoDB and GCS to
> whatever.   I'm not complaining about the way the process is handled
> actually, there is enough time to consider the options and work on a
> migration scenario, there is no imminent deadline, at least for the
> moment.   But I'm wondering what went wrong with the PaaS approach, and is
> it officially dead.
>
> Is this the end of GAE as a PaaS ?   I truly believed PaaS was the future
> of cloud architectures:  stop thinking in terms of servers, start thinking
> in terms of services.   When I started working with AppEngine, I dreamed of
> CPU as a service, with no server granularity, and I was disappointed to
> find I still had to worry about servers, starting up a new server instance,
> choosing what type of instance would be best, a scaling strategy, etc.   I
> was expecting servers as a service, i.e. serving my requests without me
> ever thinking in terms of servers.   But at least there was Ndb, search,
> memcache, GCS and a few more.
>
> Now it seems all of these are on their way out, which makes me wonder: was
> there something wrong with the concept of PaaS itself, or is it just that
> these products didn't gain traction, and are now too costly to maintain
> with regards to their user base ?   Actually, the one thing that was wrong
> with Paas from the very beginning was that it would lock a project into a
> given cloud.   That was a risk to be reckoned for users, but it could have
> been seen as a feature for the cloud provider.   Now is it for this reason
> that the mentionned services didn't make it ?  Because users would have
> been wary of being locked in, and for that reason would prefer to use
> leading products deployed on leased servers ?One thing is for sure:
> once an application has migrated to more standard services, it will not be
> tied to GCP anymore.
>
> There was a major benefit to the PaaS concept:  it was very cheap for
> startups.   Deploying ElasticSearch on a the smallest possible cluster will
> start at around $200 a month, while the search usage of a small application
> could cost less than $10.   Same for the shared memcache service offered by
> AppEngine.   Now you are having to pay for running servers all night with
> very little transactions to handle.
>
> I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on this matter ?
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the

[google-appengine] Re: REN-ISAC blacklists the whole of Appengine as a phishing site

[Luca de Alfaro]

REN-ISAC just told me that they will revert it in their next roll-out. 
Thanks for being responsive. 

On Monday, February 17, 2020 at 10:23:41 AM UTC-8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>
> Dear All, 
>
> I recently have became aware that REN-ISAC <https://www.ren-isac.net/>is 
> blacklisting the whole of Google Appengine, classifying it as a phishing 
> site. 
>
> REN-ISAC, apparently, is a provider of information on reputable domains to 
> universities, and it apparently considers phishing all sites that redirect 
> to ghs.googlehosted.com , which is the general address for sites hosted 
> on Appengine. 
> I realized because access to Google Appengine sites was blocked by my 
> university (University of California, Santa Cruz) today.  They reopened it 
> for a couple of sites that were immediately needed, but all the rest may be 
> still blocked. From our sysadmins: 
>
> They found that one or more of these sites were resolving to
> ghs.googlehosted.com which is known to be on a threat list from REN-ISAC.
> We believe that was causing the block.
>
> It might be a good idea if someone from Google reached out to REN-ISAC and 
> explained them that ghs.googlehosted.com is one of the main hosting 
> addresses for Google Cloud Apps...  I can also reach out to them, but I 
> somewhat doubt it would have the same effect. 
>
> Many thanks, and all the best, 
>
> Luca
>

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/ac7a10d6-dc69-438b-b32a-8ab78140e838%40googlegroups.com.

[google-appengine] REN-ISAC blacklists the whole of Appengine as a phishing site

[Luca de Alfaro]

Dear All, 

I recently have became aware that REN-ISAC is 
blacklisting the whole of Google Appengine, classifying it as a phishing 
site. 

REN-ISAC, apparently, is a provider of information on reputable domains to 
universities, and it apparently considers phishing all sites that redirect 
to ghs.googlehosted.com , which is the general address for sites hosted on 
Appengine. 
I realized because access to Google Appengine sites was blocked by my 
university (University of California, Santa Cruz) today.  They reopened it 
for a couple of sites that were immediately needed, but all the rest may be 
still blocked. From our sysadmins: 

They found that one or more of these sites were resolving to
ghs.googlehosted.com which is known to be on a threat list from REN-ISAC.
We believe that was causing the block.

It might be a good idea if someone from Google reached out to REN-ISAC and 
explained them that ghs.googlehosted.com is one of the main hosting 
addresses for Google Cloud Apps...  I can also reach out to them, but I 
somewhat doubt it would have the same effect. 

Many thanks, and all the best, 

Luca

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-appengine/383adbad-8edd-49d2-b457-44dcad82b085%40googlegroups.com.

[google-appengine] Re: Rate Limit Exceeded when creating new project through devloper's console

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am having the same exact problem.  Not a great onboard experience when 
even creating a new project fails... 

On Thursday, July 9, 2015 at 6:20:36 AM UTC-7, Phil Side wrote:
>
>
> I'm getting the message "Rate Limit Exceeded" when I try to create a new 
> project through the developer's console. I have no idea what rate it is 
> referring to, and so no idea how to fix the problem. Any help would be 
> appreciated. 
>

-- 
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/6846498c-003e-4d2b-8d5c-c6f428bfa959%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [google-appengine] https://1.appname.appspot.com gives error?

[Luca de Alfaro]

Thanks!!

On Monday, May 12, 2014 9:00:01 PM UTC-7, PK wrote:
>
> This will not work but the following will:
>
> https://2-dot-appname.appspot.com 
>
>
> PK
> http://www.gae123.com
>
> On May 12, 2014 at 8:08:01 PM, Luca de Alfaro 
> (luca.de...@gmail.com) 
> wrote:
>
> I have an app that has an experimental version, say version 2, and I want 
> to connect securely to it to do some testing.  
>
> https://2.appname.appspot.com 
>
> gives me an ssl error!   I thought this was allowed. 
>
> How does one access securely an experimental version of an app? 
>
> Luca
>  --
> 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/d/optout.
>
>

-- 
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] https://1.appname.appspot.com gives error?

[Luca de Alfaro]

I have an app that has an experimental version, say version 2, and I want 
to connect securely to it to do some testing. 

https://2.appname.appspot.com 

gives me an ssl error!   I thought this was allowed. 

How does one access securely an experimental version of an app? 

Luca

-- 
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] Heartbleed: do we need to renew the SSL certificates for appengine apps?

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am running an app on appengine that is secured by SSL certificates.  The 
certs are ONLY used on appengine.
Do I need to renew the certificates, after heartbleed? 
Could the private / signing keys of those certificates have been 
compromised? 

Luca

-- 
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.

Re: [google-appengine] When does new pricing come into effect?

[Luca de Alfaro]

It's April 1 and there is no new pricing yet on the appengine console.  
Perhaps this is just the delay in the update propagating? 
Luca

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 11:44:33 PM UTC-7, PK wrote:
>
> Pricing
>
> Prices are effective April 1, 2014
> --Panos
>
> On Mar 26, 2014, at 11:38 PM, timh > 
> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Has anyone seen the new pricing showing up in their console.  Mine still 
> shows instance hours at $0.08/ Hour
> though the docs now officially say $0.05/ Hour.
>
> Cheers
>
> Tim
>
> -- 
> 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/d/optout.
>
>

-- 
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] How do I activate SSL for my app served from appengine using a custom domain?

[Luca de Alfaro]

How do I activate SSL for custom domains on Google Appengine? 

The instructions I have read, at 
https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/ssl or 
https://support.google.com/a/answer/2644334?hl=en , seem to refer to an old 
version of the admin console for Google Apps. 

I looked at https://support.google.com/a/answer/2644334?hl=en , but on the 
current console, if I do Security > Advanced Settings > Set up SSO, there 
is no place where it asks for the AppEngine Application ID. 

I looked at https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/ssl .  It directs 
me to go to the Admin Console of my App domain, and to find a Domain 
Settings tab and then go to the SSL subtab.  There is no Domain Settings 
tab, however, and the "Domains" tab only allows me to add domains (without 
http / https mention). 

So, how do I setup SSL for my appengine app that uses a custom domain?

Help!
 
Luca

-- 
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: Blobstore upload stripping mime parts on Production but not Dev?

[Luca de Alfaro]

My experience is that the blobstore corrupts in strange ways content that 
is not the uploaded file that it is meant to receive. 
I went through a litany of problems trying to have a form with an uploaded 
file being directed first to the blobstore (for upload storage), then to 
appengine (for form processing). 
The only reliable solution I have found is to do file uploads separate from 
all other data submission, so that the blobstore has no other data to 
corrupt. 

On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 7:40:37 AM UTC-8, Rich wrote:
>
> Hi, 
>
> I'm trying to include some additional data in a blobstore upload which I 
> can then process with the BlobInfo. According to 
> https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/java/blobstore/ :
>
> *When the Blobstore rewrites the user's request, the MIME parts of the 
> uploaded files have their bodies emptied, and the blob key is added as a 
> MIME part header. All other form fields and parts are preserved and passed 
> to the upload handler. *
>
> This seems to be working fine on the Dev Server but *not* on the live 
> AppEngine. 
>
> Having got the upload URL from the blobstore service, on the client-side 
> I'm then doing:
>
> var formData = new FormData();
> formData.append("upload-request", JSON.stringify({
>   myExtraData: "something"
> }));
>
> for (var idx = 0; idx < files.length; idx++) {
>   formData.append(files[idx].name, files[idx]);
> }
>
> xhr.open("POST", uploadUrl);
> xhr.send(formData);
>
> And then trying to process it on the server side with:
>
> log.warning("isMultipartContent: " + 
> ServletFileUpload.isMultipartContent(req));
> ServletFileUpload upload = new ServletFileUpload();
> FileItemIterator iterator = upload.getItemIterator(req);
> int count = 0;
> while (iterator.hasNext()) {
>   ++count;
>   FileItemStream item = iterator.next();
>   if (item.isFormField()) {
> log.warning("Got a form field: " + item.getFieldName());
>   } else {
> log.warning("Got an uploaded file: " + item.getFieldName() +
> ", name = " + item.getName());
>   }
> }
> log.warning("FileItem count = %s", count);
>
> When I run this on the local Dev server, everything works perfectly and it 
> happily logs both the form field part and the re-written (content-stripped) 
> file part and a count of 2.
>
> When I run it on the live App Engine, it logs:
> isMultipart: true
> FileItem count = 0
>
> It seems that the live server, contrary to the documentation, is stripping 
> all the mime parts from the request.
>
> Note, that the blobs are still retrievable 
> with blobstore.get{File,Blob}Infos(req), but I cannot access the additional 
> data that was sent with the request.
>
> Has anyone seen this before? Is this is a known bug or have I 
> misinterpreted the docs? Does anyone know if the same is true in the Python 
> runtime? Can anyone suggest a workaround?
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
>
>

-- 
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: What is the most efficient way to compute a rolling median on appengine?

[Luca de Alfaro]

If you can weigh recent data more than older data, you might consider 
instead of building a rolling average, an  exponentially decaying weights 
average. 

You can store in ndb, sharded, total_amount, and total_weight, and 
timestamp.  
Then, when you get an update, you compute the decay_factor, which is equal 
to exp(- time since update / time constant). 
You then do: 
total_amount = total_amount * decay_factor + amount_now
total_weight = total_weight * decay_factor + weight_now
timestamp = present time
avg = total_amount / total_weight


On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:07:34 PM UTC-8, Mathieu Simard wrote:
>
> Since there is no appengine solution available such as the Redis atomic 
> list, I'm left wondering how to implement a cost effective rolling median.
> Has anyone come up with a solution that would be more convenient than 
> running a redis instance on Google Compute Engine?
>

-- 
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] Great! Appengine Frontend is now free!

[Luca de Alfaro]

Well, at least it seems to be free for me!  My instace(s) have been happily 
serving for the whole day, and yet, I am showing 0 hours of usage. 
Is this perhaps related to the daylight savings time change?  app id is 
crowdgrader. 

Cheers, and 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] Re: Compilation very slow right now?

[Luca de Alfaro]

Now it works again, fyi. -Luca

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:42:10 PM UTC-7, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>
> I am trying to upload a new Python code version of my app right now, and 
> compilation seems to be very slow, taking 10 minutes or more (I never got 
> one compilation to terminate). Anybody noticing the same? 
> This is not the first slowdown I noticed... is the "compilation pipeline" 
> subject to occasional traffic jams? 
>
> Luca
>

-- 
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: Compilation very slow right now?

[Luca de Alfaro]

This is what I get:

01:43 PM Error 503: --- begin server output ---

Try Again (503)
An unexpected failure has occurred. Please try again.
--- end server output ---
Precompilation failed. Your app can still serve but may have reduced 
startup performance. You can retry the update later to retry the 
precompilation step.


On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:42:10 PM UTC-7, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>
> I am trying to upload a new Python code version of my app right now, and 
> compilation seems to be very slow, taking 10 minutes or more (I never got 
> one compilation to terminate). Anybody noticing the same? 
> This is not the first slowdown I noticed... is the "compilation pipeline" 
> subject to occasional traffic jams? 
>
> Luca
>

-- 
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] Compilation very slow right now?

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am trying to upload a new Python code version of my app right now, and 
compilation seems to be very slow, taking 10 minutes or more (I never got 
one compilation to terminate). Anybody noticing the same? 
This is not the first slowdown I noticed... is the "compilation pipeline" 
subject to occasional traffic jams? 

Luca

-- 
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: major bug in live instance hours calculation

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am having sort of the opposite problem.  One of my apps was happily 
serving requests for several hours, during which the "billed" instances 
were 0, even thought the "active" instances were 1-2. 

Luca

On Friday, October 4, 2013 1:30:27 PM UTC-7, pdknsk wrote:
>
> As of few days ago a free app with barely any (and unchanged) traffic runs 
> out of instance hours about 16h into the day. I'm still assembling evidence 
> on this bug, so before I file a bug report I'd like to know if anyone else 
> has noticed the dashboard to report higher instance hours than usual (on 
> frontends and backends). This does most likely not affect usage history 
> (billing) so would be much easier to notice on free apps because of quota 
> denial.
>

-- 
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: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

Again thanks for the suggestion.  Using the low-level interface works 
beautifully.  I had to read the source code of appengine to figure out 
wholly how to use it, but once that was done, I almost like the low-level 
interface more than the high-level one.  Entities behave like dictionaries 
(plus the key field), simple translations to/from protocol buffers, etc. 
The only weird thing is that for StringList properties, you cannot set the 
StringList field to []: you need to set it to None. 
This is kind of silly; they should have added an internal translation from 
[] to None to make this transparent. 
However, all my code works beautifully now, and I can get the benefits of 
expando models without even having to worry about having expando models! 

Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:03:07 AM UTC-7, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>
> Thanks!  This is a great suggestion; it might be the only one that works 
> (short of giving up doing what I wanted to do in Python). 
> The interesting thing is that the Java side has no trouble at all reading 
> those entities. 
>
> Luca
>
> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:11:51 AM UTC-7, timh wrote:
>>
>> And here is some example code for getting and putting raw entities - ie 
>> no model involved
>>
>> from google.appengine.api import datastorefrom google.appengine.api import 
>> datastore_errorsdef get_entities(keys):rpc = 
>> datastore.GetRpcFromKwargs({})keys, multiple = 
>> datastore.NormalizeAndTypeCheckKeys(keys)entities = Nonetry:
>> entities = datastore.Get(keys, rpc=rpc)except 
>> datastore_errors.EntityNotFoundError:assert not multiple
>> return entitiesdef put_entities(entities):rpc = 
>> datastore.GetRpcFromKwargs({})keys = datastore.Put(entities, rpc=rpc)
>> return keys
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:09:56 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>>
>>> Alternately make the property not required  (required=False), load the 
>>> entities set the value of the list to a [] and then rewrite, once you have 
>>> migrated all the entities you can then
>>> set the property to be required.
>>>
>>> You do need to think about model migration when changing classes 
>>> adding/removing or changing the types of properties.
>>>
>>> T
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:07:25 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>>>>
>>>> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
>>>> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>>>>
>>>> T
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> This is pretty bad!
>>>>>
>>>>> As pointed out in 
>>>>> https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962 , if 
>>>>> you add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
>>>>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>>>>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>>>>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>>>>> Python! 
>>>>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>>>>
>>>>> Luca
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a 
>>>>>> StringListProperty.
>>>>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=False, indexed=True)
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=True, indexed=True,
>>>>>> > default=[])
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>>>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
>>>>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>>>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>>>>> default value.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

-- 
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: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

That's what I had at the beginning, and it breaks. 
This is a bit of a sad situation, as it breaks interoperability in simple 
ways, but I will try the suggestion of reading without a model and then 
writing with a model to do an update.  I don't love it, as it makes the 
code ugly and not maintainable... my esthetic side really wishes for this 
bug to be fixed. 

Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 10:32:37 PM UTC-7, timh wrote:
>
> What about just dropping the required parameter from the property have you 
> tried that.
>
>
>
> On Thursday, July 11, 2013 12:00:17 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>
>> I tried to use both default=[] (which did not stop the error from 
>> occurring), and required=False (which generated a new error, as the only 
>> value allowed for "required" is True). 
>> So it appears that the old solutions for this bug are not viable.  
>> A mapreduce would cost a lot of money given the large amount of data 
>> involved. 
>>
>> This is quite a serious bug in my opinion, as it prevents 
>> interoperability between Python and Java, as well as updating the structure 
>> of entities.  I wonder if there is any hope that the AppEngine team take it 
>> up and fix it? 
>>
>> Luca
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:13:55 AM UTC-7, Moises Belchin wrote:
>>>
>>> Consider using required=False and default=None or default=[] to avoid 
>>> these problems.
>>> Other way is to use GenericProperty, use MapReduce to convert data from 
>>> one type to another then change the property type, required, defaults, etc.
>>>
>>> Good luck !
>>>
>>>
>>> Saludos.
>>> Moisés Belchín.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/7/10 timh 
>>>
>>>> Alternately make the property not required  (required=False), load the 
>>>> entities set the value of the list to a [] and then rewrite, once you have 
>>>> migrated all the entities you can then
>>>> set the property to be required.
>>>>
>>>> You do need to think about model migration when changing classes 
>>>> adding/removing or changing the types of properties.
>>>>
>>>> T
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:07:25 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>>>>>
>>>>> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
>>>>> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>>>>>
>>>>> T
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is pretty bad!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As pointed out in https://code.google.com/p/**
>>>>>> googleappengine/issues/detail?**id=8962<https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962>,
>>>>>>  if you add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in 
>>>>>> the 
>>>>>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>>>>>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>>>>>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>>>>>> Python! 
>>>>>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Luca
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a 
>>>>>>> StringListProperty.
>>>>>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(**required=False, indexed=True)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(**required=True, indexed=True,
>>>>>>> > default=[])
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>>>>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need 
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>>>>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>>>>>> default value.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  -- 
>>>> 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.

[google-appengine] Re: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

Thanks!  This is a great suggestion; it might be the only one that works 
(short of giving up doing what I wanted to do in Python). 
The interesting thing is that the Java side has no trouble at all reading 
those entities. 

Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:11:51 AM UTC-7, timh wrote:
>
> And here is some example code for getting and putting raw entities - ie no 
> model involved
>
> from google.appengine.api import datastorefrom google.appengine.api import 
> datastore_errorsdef get_entities(keys):rpc = 
> datastore.GetRpcFromKwargs({})keys, multiple = 
> datastore.NormalizeAndTypeCheckKeys(keys)entities = Nonetry:
> entities = datastore.Get(keys, rpc=rpc)except 
> datastore_errors.EntityNotFoundError:assert not multiple
> return entitiesdef put_entities(entities):rpc = 
> datastore.GetRpcFromKwargs({})keys = datastore.Put(entities, rpc=rpc)
> return keys
>
>
> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:09:56 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>
>> Alternately make the property not required  (required=False), load the 
>> entities set the value of the list to a [] and then rewrite, once you have 
>> migrated all the entities you can then
>> set the property to be required.
>>
>> You do need to think about model migration when changing classes 
>> adding/removing or changing the types of properties.
>>
>> T
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:07:25 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>>
>>> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>>>
>>> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
>>> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>>>
>>> T
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is pretty bad!
>>>>
>>>> As pointed out in 
>>>> https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962 , if 
>>>> you add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
>>>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>>>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>>>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>>>> Python! 
>>>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>>>
>>>> Luca
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a 
>>>>> StringListProperty.
>>>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=False, indexed=True)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=True, indexed=True,
>>>>> > default=[])
>>>>> >
>>>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>>>
>>>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
>>>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>>>> default value.)
>>>>>
>>>>>

-- 
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: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

required=False generates a new error, stating that the only value for 
required is True. 

Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:09:56 AM UTC-7, timh wrote:
>
> Alternately make the property not required  (required=False), load the 
> entities set the value of the list to a [] and then rewrite, once you have 
> migrated all the entities you can then
> set the property to be required.
>
> You do need to think about model migration when changing classes 
> adding/removing or changing the types of properties.
>
> T
>
> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:07:25 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>
>> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>>
>> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
>> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>>
>> T
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>>
>>> This is pretty bad!
>>>
>>> As pointed out in 
>>> https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962 , if 
>>> you add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
>>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>>> Python! 
>>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>>
>>> Luca
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>>> > Hello,
>>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a StringListProperty.
>>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>>> >
>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=False, indexed=True)
>>>> >
>>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=True, indexed=True,
>>>> > default=[])
>>>> >
>>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>>
>>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
>>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>>> default value.)
>>>>
>>>>

-- 
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: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

Yes, and it did not work. 
I cannot fix all the data, as the cost would be quite large. 
This leaves giving up doing what I wanted to do in Python, or  fetching the 
underlying data without a model. 
Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:07:25 AM UTC-7, timh wrote:
>
> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>
> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>
> T
>
> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>
>> This is pretty bad!
>>
>> As pointed out in 
>> https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962 , if you 
>> add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>> Python! 
>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>
>> Luca
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>> > Hello,
>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a StringListProperty.
>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>> >
>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=False, indexed=True)
>>> >
>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=True, indexed=True,
>>> > default=[])
>>> >
>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>
>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>> default value.)
>>>
>>>

-- 
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: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

I tried to use both default=[] (which did not stop the error from 
occurring), and required=False (which generated a new error, as the only 
value allowed for "required" is True). 
So it appears that the old solutions for this bug are not viable.  
A mapreduce would cost a lot of money given the large amount of data 
involved. 

This is quite a serious bug in my opinion, as it prevents interoperability 
between Python and Java, as well as updating the structure of entities.  I 
wonder if there is any hope that the AppEngine team take it up and fix it? 

Luca

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 12:13:55 AM UTC-7, Moises Belchin wrote:
>
> Consider using required=False and default=None or default=[] to avoid 
> these problems.
> Other way is to use GenericProperty, use MapReduce to convert data from 
> one type to another then change the property type, required, defaults, etc.
>
> Good luck !
>
>
> Saludos.
> Moisés Belchín.
>
>
> 2013/7/10 timh >
>
>> Alternately make the property not required  (required=False), load the 
>> entities set the value of the list to a [] and then rewrite, once you have 
>> migrated all the entities you can then
>> set the property to be required.
>>
>> You do need to think about model migration when changing classes 
>> adding/removing or changing the types of properties.
>>
>> T
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 3:07:25 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
>>>
>>> Have you tried setting the default value to [] as per that error ?
>>>
>>> If your model is blowing up you can always fetch the underlying data 
>>> without a model, fix the data up and write it back.
>>>
>>> T
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:56:50 AM UTC+8, Luca de Alfaro wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is pretty bad!
>>>>
>>>> As pointed out in https://code.google.com/p/**
>>>> googleappengine/issues/detail?**id=8962<https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962>,
>>>>  if you add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
>>>> datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
>>>> Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with 
>>>> null StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from 
>>>> Python! 
>>>> These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 
>>>>
>>>> Luca
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a 
>>>>> StringListProperty.
>>>>> > I get an error if I define it as such:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(**required=False, indexed=True)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > However, on changing it to:
>>>>> > class Test(db.Expando):
>>>>> > people = db.StringListProperty(**required=True, indexed=True,
>>>>> > default=[])
>>>>> >
>>>>> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>>>>>
>>>>> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
>>>>> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
>>>>> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
>>>>> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
>>>>> default value.)
>>>>>
>>>>>  -- 
>> 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.

[google-appengine] Re: Error if I set "required=False" for a StringListProperty

[Luca de Alfaro]

This is pretty bad!

As pointed out 
in https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=8962 , if you 
add a StringListProperty to a model with existing entities in the 
datastore, then you cannot read those entities any more! 
Furthermore, in Java it is apparently possible to write entities with null 
StringListProperty fields.  Those entities cannot then be read from Python! 
These are pretty big problems -- is there any solution? 

Luca

On Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:57:17 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Spear wrote:
>
> On Mar 22, 11:09 pm, dhruvbird  wrote:
> > Hello,
> >   I have a model with a single attribute that is a StringListProperty.
> > I get an error if I define it as such:
> >
> > class Test(db.Expando):
> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=False, indexed=True)
> >
> > However, on changing it to:
> > class Test(db.Expando):
> > people = db.StringListProperty(required=True, indexed=True,
> > default=[])
> >
> > It starts working. Any ideas why this is happening??
>
> ListPropertys are always required; you can't set their value to None.
> If a particular entity has no values for the ListProperty, you need to
> set it to the empty list.  (Note that you can still set a default
> value of 'None', which magically uses an empty list, not None, as the
> default value.)
>
>

-- 
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] Precompilation failing occasionally

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am noticing that precompilation is quite slow, and can fail occasionally 
(see message below). 
This started happening a few days ago (it used to be very fast), and this 
morning, it has gotten worse, with (so far) 3 out of 4 deployment attempts 
ending in precompilation failing.
Are others noticing the same? 

Many thanks, 

Luca

08:41 AM Compilation starting.
08:45 AM Error 500: --- begin server output ---



500 Server Error


Error: Server Error
The server encountered an error and could not complete your 
request.If the problem persists, please http://code.google.com/appengine/community.html";>report your 
problem and mention this error message and the query that caused it.


--- end server output ---
Precompilation failed. Your app can still serve but may have reduced 
startup performance. You can retry the update later to retry the 
precompilation step.

-- 
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] Is it possible to use multiprocessing Pool in Python 2.7 on App Engine?

[Luca de Alfaro]

No, and that would be perfect... is that supported on AppEngine? 

And btw, how do I find out about which packages are supported?  I did not 
know that some futures packages from pypi could by supported.  I ask 
because there are a few more packages (scipy, for instance) that I really 
wish would be supported...

Luca

On Sunday, May 27, 2012 2:39:18 AM UTC-7, Brian Quinlan wrote:
>
> Have you considered using concurrent.futures: 
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/futures ? 
>
>
>
> Cheers, 
> Brian 
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Luca de Alfaro 
>  wrote: 
> > I have some processing that would benefit from parallelism -- the 
> > multiprocessing Pool class would be ideal. 
> > Is it available in App Engine?  The Mapping API does not work for my 
> > purpose, since it is in-memory processing that I am trying to do. 
> > Thanks! 
> > 
> > Luca 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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/-/yzxvmQQyWAIJ. 
> > 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. 
>

On Sunday, May 27, 2012 2:39:18 AM UTC-7, Brian Quinlan wrote:
>
> Have you considered using concurrent.futures: 
> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/futures ? 
>
>
>
> Cheers, 
> Brian 
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Luca de Alfaro 
>  wrote: 
> > I have some processing that would benefit from parallelism -- the 
> > multiprocessing Pool class would be ideal. 
> > Is it available in App Engine?  The Mapping API does not work for my 
> > purpose, since it is in-memory processing that I am trying to do. 
> > Thanks! 
> > 
> > Luca 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 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/-/yzxvmQQyWAIJ. 
> > 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. 
>

-- 
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/-/HNyRzPrDYQUJ.
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] Is it possible to use multiprocessing Pool in Python 2.7 on App Engine?

[Luca de Alfaro]

I have some processing that would benefit from parallelism -- the 
multiprocessing Pool class would be ideal.  
Is it available in App Engine?  The Mapping API does not work for my 
purpose, since it is in-memory processing that I am trying to do. 
Thanks! 

Luca

-- 
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/-/yzxvmQQyWAIJ.
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] Queues are stuck since 11:12am PST today -- can someone look into it ASAP?

[Luca de Alfaro]

The queues for our AppEngine App (camiologger) show no sign of
processing since 11:12am today.  Not even pressing "Run Now" causes
the jobs to run successfully.  I would be very grateful if someone can
look into it!
We had trouble before of queues that stopped processing jobs, but not
as long as this time...
I am hoping someone can help!

Luca

-- 
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] Task queues sometimes stop for hours, then restart

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am having a problem where task queues stop for 30 minutes - 2 hours, and 
then restart (using a large number of instances to pick up the slack). 
 This is causing us great distress, since we were hoping we could rely on 
task queues for timely processing of some workload.  

Does anybody know what can cause this stalling? 
Is anybody else seeing it? 

Luca

-- 
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/-/oqpSUgK0ORAJ.
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] Access to bulk data from DB possible?

[Luca de Alfaro]

We need to write an app/site whose general usage pattern matches quite well 
AppEngine, except for one thing: the site will be collecting data / logs, 
and every now and then, we need to download bulk data from the database 
tables collecting such data / logs, for offline analysis. 
If we went with a "non-appengine" solution, we could obviously do this by 
generating e.g. csv files from DB queries or dumps, and then processing the 
files. 
Will it be possible to have the same kind of simple access to bulk data on 
AppEngine?  We can of course build a (web) API that issues DB queries and 
produces csv files for download, but my concerns are:

   1. I remember that there is a limit to how many records can be extracted 
   from a DB using a query (1000?), so that we would have to implement the 
   query with continuation parameters etc -- feasible, but complicating the 
   design.
   2. I worry about the execution time of the query (is it still true that 
   processes taking over 1s are killed?). 

I guess access to log files / bulk data must be a pretty common requirement 
for many apps, so I am hoping someone has good words of advice... 
Many thanks!!

Luca

-- 
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/-/FD50slblUYEJ.
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] Advice on deploying a Django App on AppEngine

[Luca de Alfaro]

I am struggling with the decision of where to deploy a site I am building 
with Django. 
I am very keen on App Engine, and I have been reading about django-nonrel, 
so that seems to be a very appealing route. 
However, I have a few questions: 

1.  Is it advisable to wait until the 3000-file-limit issue is solved before 
deciding for AppEngine?  It seems the standard Django 1.3 is very close to 
the limit, not sure about django-nonrel.  My app has something like 50-100 
files right now.  I understand a fix is in progress. 

2.  I read somewhere in the past that Django takes a long time to start on 
AppEngine.  Is this still true now?  Is this a serious consideration?  I 
tend to think not, since even other scalings (bringing up more machines on 
EC2, ...) are not instantaneous.

3.  A typical request causes several hits to the datastore; typically at 
least some access to a permissions table (to see if the user can perform a 
given operation), followed by one or more accesses to actually carry out the 
request.  Will this work relatively well?  I am worried that if the latency 
to the datastore is high, since Python on AppEngine is single-threaded, then 
a single AppEngine instance will be able to serve considerably fewer qps 
than e.g. a RackSpace Cloud virtual machine, where the latency to the db 
could be lower.  Any insight on how many AppEngine instances are equivalent 
to, say, a Rackspace Cloud VM? 

Thanks!! -- Luca

-- 
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/-/SFjHAhSnZ40J.
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.