[google-appengine] Re: Where is the extra latency coming from?
There isn't any pending_ms. On Jun 27, 2:04 pm, Waleed Abdulla wrote: > Check to see if there is a "pending_ms" value in the logs. If so, then that > indicates that your request was put in a queue to wait for it's turn to run. > I had a long thread about a similar question a week or so ago (just search > for pending_ms in the archives to find it). > > Waleed > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Spines wrote: > > I'm using GAE/Java. I record the time it takes for my code to execute > > inside the code and output it to the logs as a debug message. The time it > > takes for my code to execute is usually just a fraction of the time that is > > shown on the logs as the total time to respond to a request. > > > For example, in my code, my debug message will say that my code took 58ms > > to run. But the log message will show: / 421ms 130cpu_ms 20api_cpu_ms, > > indicating that it took 421ms to return a response. This is typical of > > every request, this is not due to loading requests. Also, I am the only > > person accessing my app right now, so it's not because it's waiting for > > another request to finish processing first. > > > What causes this extra latency? Is there any way I can fix it? > > > -- > > 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/-/y4Lka5msRooJ. > > 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 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: Updated App Engine Pricing FAQ!
I'm quite happy with the new "scheduler knobs". My app takes 10 seconds on a loading request, and the current scheduler starts up new instances too often, making too many users experience loading requests. With the new scheduler, I'll be able to tweak the scheduler so less users experience loading requests. -- 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] Where is the extra latency coming from?
I'm using GAE/Java. I record the time it takes for my code to execute inside the code and output it to the logs as a debug message. The time it takes for my code to execute is usually just a fraction of the time that is shown on the logs as the total time to respond to a request. For example, in my code, my debug message will say that my code took 58ms to run. But the log message will show: / 421ms 130cpu_ms 20api_cpu_ms, indicating that it took 421ms to return a response. This is typical of every request, this is not due to loading requests. Also, I am the only person accessing my app right now, so it's not because it's waiting for another request to finish processing first. What causes this extra latency? Is there any way I can fix it? -- 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/-/y4Lka5msRooJ. 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: FAQ for out of preview pricing changes
@Ugorji Shutting down an instance after 1 minute of inactivity would be bad for java apps which usually take 5+ seconds to start up. The scheduler will probably take into account a bunch of different variables in determining how long to leave an instance running. On May 20, 11:52 am, Ugorji wrote: > Hi Greg, > > Thanks for the detailed response. It removes a lot of the uncertainty, > allowing us focus on actual concerns. > > My main concerns now are: > - prohibitive cost of backend instance > - 15 minutes idle time cost for frontend instances > - details on what experimental entails, with respect to GO runtime > > *Prohibitive cost of backend instance* > Backend Instances seem ridiculously and prohibitively high ($115/month for a > resident 256MB/1.2GHz instance). Their prohibitive costs makes them very > unattractive for a lot of users who could leverage this functionality, > causing us to look elsewhere. > > In a way, it seems we're caught between a rock and a hard place. Backends > are an excellent way to do long-running CPU-intensive actions, allowing us > move away from the current practice of spawning chains of tasks which each > complete in a set time, or using a map-reduce operation. However, the > backends are so expensive that most people will not use them. Unfortunately, > the current practice of using frontend instances and tasks/map-reduce is now > expensive also because for each instance, we have to pay an extra 1/4 > instance hour tax beyond our usage. > > *15 minutes idle time cost for frontend instances* > For backends, the 1/4 hour may make sense, since backends are typically used > for long-running tasks. > > However, for frontends where requests should typically finish within a > second, and loading time can be within a second, the 1/4 hour tax seems > unfair. Since loading time and request time for frontends can be within a > second, it doesn't make sense to keep idle instances up for 15 minutes. > Something in the tune of 1 minute for instances beyond the first one is more > ideal (ie if u have one instance handling requests, keep the 15 minutes idle > time. For instances 2 and up, shut them down after 1 minute of inactivity). > > *details on what experimental entails, with respect to GO runtime* > The other question I had was with GO support. The current SDK > - does not support transactions, batch datastore operations, parallel > requests, etc > - depends on using the remote API to the python SDK which could limit the > ability to do some functionality (e.g. integrated testing framework, etc) > - has an API which sometimes feels like a proof-of-concept API, and not a > fully designed uniform API set > - Also, the Google Group for it seems like a ghost town, which suggests > either low interest or some level of disappointment in the current SDK set > > It looks really "experimental" unlike the Java SDK which was experimental > when released but was much more featureful and integrated. Can you define > what experimental means with respect to GO runtime: > - how long will it be supported for, in case Google decides to pull the plug > for lack of demand > - is there a roadmap for the features. -- 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: What do you want to see answered in Greg's pricing FAQ?
1. How will the "Always On" feature be handled? On May 12, 12:14 am, Kenneth wrote: > Greg mentioned he was putting together an FAQ so let's help him out! > > If you're going to answer this just put in your question into a single line, > let's not try and answer them here or give opinions, there's plenty of other > threads for that. I do understand that Google doesn't have answers to some > these. > > Here's my list: > > 1) What is the time granularity of the instance pricing? ie if I have an > instance up for 5 minutes, what am I charged, $0.08 / 60*5? > 2) Will I be able to tune the scheduler myself, ie set it to performance or > low cost, Will I be able to limit the min or max number of instances > created (with the obvious impact on user experience)? > 3) Python concurrency, will this require any code changes, do you have any > estimates based on your testing of the number of well behaved requests per > second a single instance will be able to handle for a given framework? > 4) Database charges, when can you give us more details over what Max gave in > the other thread, are you charging for deletes, what do you expect the ratio > to be between the new pricing metric and the Datastore API calls metric we > have today? > 5) Will you be charging differently for instances that use different amounts > of memory, since this seems to be the cost that you're going after that > isn't charged for in the current model. > > Thanks, > Kenneth -- 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: Under new billing, how would a multiget/multiput be billed?
@Max Ross I suppose if you split it up that way where writes would actually cost more since it would count index writes too, then that would still encourage efficiency. I've spent effort reducing the number of indexes on my entities, and didn't want that effort to be wasted. On May 11, 9:22 am, "Max Ross (Google)" wrote: > We're still sorting out the details, but we will most likely be charging for > entity reads, entity writes, and index writes. This is actually pretty > similar to what we do today, but we think the units are easier to understand > than cpu. > > Under this proposed model, multiget/multiput are a single api call but the > cost will be determined by the number of entities you are fetching or the > number of entities and indexes you are writing with that single api call. > > Question for Spines: > Why do you feel that charging the same amount for reads and writes > discourages efficiency? I think the correct incentives are in place under > the proposed model: For writes, if you have fewer indices on your entity > your writes are cheaper. For reads, the cost is directly tied to how much > data you pull back. > > Hope this helps, > Max -- 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] New pricing question: Will we be charged for idle time of instance hours?
Will we be charged for the time that an instance is up and running, even if it isn't processing a request, or only for the time that it is processing a request? Example: If an instance is running for a minute, but only serves 1 request that takes 200ms, will we be charged for 1 minute or for 200ms? -- 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: New Pricing
I read that too. Seems like that is saying there is no free amount of reserved instances. On-demand Frontend Instances- 24 Instance Hours - $0.08 / hour Reserved Frontend Instances -blank___- $0.05 / hour Looks like the $9/mo gets you an SLA and the ability to be "infinitely scalable". On May 10, 2:56 pm, stephenp wrote: > http://www.google.com/enterprise/appengine/appengine_pricing.html > > I have no idea how this applies to python. > > Stephen -- 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: New Pricing
Where did you read that $9/month would get you one always-on instance? On May 10, 1:54 pm, stephenp wrote: > I believe for $9/month you get one always-on instance. Then, you need to go > make your app thread-safe and turn on "multiple requests" for your app so > each instance can handle more than one request at a time. Also, they're > going to make their instance scheduler better at keeping your instances > busy. > > Stephen -- 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: Under new billing, how would a multiget/multiput be billed?
Similarly, with the new pricing, gets and puts will now cost the same? I liked the old model that encouraged efficiency. On May 10, 1:50 pm, Spines wrote: > Doing a get of a 100 entities at once would be one API call right? So > it would cost the same as doing a get of 1 entity? -- 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] Under new billing, how would a multiget/multiput be billed?
Doing a get of a 100 entities at once would be one API call right? So it would cost the same as doing a get of 1 entity? -- 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] New pricing: Will having a reserved instance cost $36 per month?
I want to have at least 1 reserved instance so that my users will experience less loading requests. Since we get 24 instance hours free per day, could that be used on having a reserved instance? Or does it only apply to on-demand instances? Having 1 reserved instance cost $36 per month is very discouraging considering it used to cost $9 per month for 3 reserved instances. I hope we will be able to use our free quota towards a reserved instance. -- 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] What will the memory limit of an app engine instance be in the future? Is it going down?
What will the memory limit of an app engine instance be in the future? Is it going down? The backends are configurable from 128mb to 1024mb, but what is the limit for a regular instance? -- 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: HR Vs. Master-Slave Comparison. Is it worth extra cost?
Ikai, The docs seem to indicate that master/slave is the way to go unless you have a "mission critical" application. Maybe the docs should be updated? Also when creating a new app, master/slave is the default storage option, and you don't even see the High replication option unless you click "edit". Shouldn't the default be High replication? Also, does the line in docs about the high replication datastore: "Offers the highest level of availability for reads and writes", imply that we can expect much fewer latency spikes for gets and queries? -- 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: Huge cold start times, up to 75 seconds!
More info: My cpu_ms for cold starts is consistently between 7 and 9 seconds, yet the actual time it takes to respond fluctuates from 8 to 75 seconds. Log lines: 2011-03-03 09:36:26.620 /?tab=recentedits&ajax=true 200 47085ms 8873cpu_ms 30api_cpu_ms 2011-03-03 09:25:38.135 /?tab=popular&ajax=true 200 39145ms 8640cpu_ms 30api_cpu_ms 2011-03-03 07:38:15.167 /?tab=needshelp&ajax=true 200 17632ms 8476cpu_ms 30api_cpu_ms 2011-03-03 07:18:03.143 /?tab=new&ajax=true 200 75680ms 8896cpu_ms 30api_cpu_ms -- 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] Huge cold start times, up to 75 seconds!
For the past couple days, I've been experiencing huge cold start times. They range from 10 seconds, all the way up to 75 seconds. On average they seem to be about 30 seconds. Just a couple weeks ago my cold start times ranged from 7 to 15 seconds. To make sure it wasn't due to any changes in my code, I tested out an older version of my code too. It was also experiencing large cold start times. -- 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] Is the 1 write per second to an entity group limitation only for HR datastore or for Master/slave too?
The using the HR datastore page (http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/ python/datastore/hr/overview.html) says: "This allows queries on a single guestbook to be strongly consistent, but also limits changes to the guestbook to 1 write per second (the supported limit for entity groups)". I remember reading a while ago (before the HR datastore existed) that you could get about 1 to 5 writes per second to an entity group. Is the supported writes per second to an entity group less on the HR datastore? -- 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: Why are gets and queries on the HR datastore significantly faster than on the Master/Slave datastore?
I haven't tried out the HR datastore yet, I'm just basing this off of looking at the status pages. I'll probably switch to the HR datastore if we can expect faster queries and gets. On Mar 2, 7:01 am, Jeff Schwartz wrote: > Just curios, are you experiencing this better performance for entities only > within entity groups or otherwise? > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Spines wrote: > > Looking at the app engine status page, it seems that gets and queries on > > the HR datastore are consistently faster than on the Master/Slave datastore. > > From comparing the graphs, it looks like HR datastore queries are almost > > twice as fast. > > > Why is this? Is this something we can expect to continue in the future, or > > is it due to some other reason (eg. not as many people are using the HR > > datastore yet)? > > > -- > > 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. > > -- > *Jeff > Schwartz*http://jefftschwartz.appspot.com/http://www.linkedin.com/in/jefftschwartz > follow me on twitter: @jefftschwartz -- 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] Why are gets and queries on the HR datastore significantly faster than on the Master/Slave datastore?
Looking at the app engine status page, it seems that gets and queries on the HR datastore are consistently faster than on the Master/Slave datastore. >From comparing the graphs, it looks like HR datastore queries are almost twice as fast. Why is this? Is this something we can expect to continue in the future, or is it due to some other reason (eg. not as many people are using the HR datastore yet)? -- 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: Is the request time limit for loading requests still 30 seconds?
I just had a loading request that lasted 37 seconds this time. / 200 37159ms 9480cpu_ms 30api_cpu_ms -- 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] Is the request time limit for loading requests still 30 seconds?
Is the request time limit for loading requests still 30 seconds? I didn't think there had been an increase, but I just had a loading request on my app that completed successfully after 31652ms. -- 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] Just verifying - App Engine is hosted on servers located in the USA right?
Just verifying - App Engine is hosted on servers located in the USA right? And will stay that way? The reason I ask is because I've been reading up about "fair use" for using other people's images, and it seems that things are much clearer legally if your servers are located in the USA. -- 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-appeng...@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] ETA on "Ability to reserve instances to reduce application loading overhead"
Any idea when "Ability to reserve instances to reduce application loading overhead" will be coming? Its been on the road map for about 6 months i think. The reason I ask is that I'm considering using Grails for a new app engine project. I deployed a sample application and the cold starts were taking almost 30 seconds, so I figure that once I add more code to it, cold starts will take longer than the 30 second deadline. So if that feature will be coming out within the next 3 months or so, I figure I'll go with Grails, if not, then I'll do something else. -- 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-appeng...@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: problem Avg CPU (API) in dashboard
It's most likely because you are experiencing a high percentage of loading requests. If you are only accessing your app infrequently then a large percentage of your requests will be loading requests which take a lot of extra time. And this is probably what is bringing your average up. Once your site gets a steady stream of traffic, you will have a much lower percentage of loading requests. If you're interested, Here's an article I wrote about optimizing loading requests: http://www.answercow.com/q/103005/google-app-engine-cold-start-guide-for-java On Aug 18, 9:29 am, ld493 wrote: > Hello, it's the first time I use google app engine and I would like to > know why I have a lot of time of Avg CPU (API) in my dashboard for my > link. > > I'm just log in and do that to verify the log in and the password that > is in my persistence manager that contains just 2 logins : > > PersistenceManager pm = PMF.get().getPersistenceManager(); > String query = "select from " + User.class.getName()+" where login == > log && password == pass "+"parametersString log, String pass"; > > List user = (List) pm.newQuery(query).execute(loginParam, > psw); > > For this I have 2000 for Avg CPU (API) in my dashboard and the > message : > - "This URI uses a hight amount of CPU and may soon exceed its > quotas". > > It's the persistence manager that uses this hight amount of CPU time > what can I do to reduce it? -- 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-appeng...@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: SDK 1.3.6 released!
I did some performance testing on the new high performance image serving that uses getServingUrl. If anyones interested I wrote about it here: http://www.answercow.com/q/304002/app-engines-high-performance-image-serving-system On Aug 18, 11:45 am, Spines wrote: > Thank you App Engine Team! I had been struggling with how I would get > a decent solution for displaying lots of thumbnail images on one page, > and with this release and the getServingUrl function, it seems like my > problems are solved! > > On Aug 17, 2:19 pm, "Ikai L (Google)" wrote: > > > > > Hey guys, > > > This is just a heads up that App Engine SDK version 1.3.6 is officially > > released! Read more about it here: > > >http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2010/08/multi-tenancy-support-hig... > > > Release notes are below: > > > Java 1.3.6 > > > - Multitenancy is now supported in the datastore, allowing better > > compartmentalization of user data. > > - Automatic image thumbnailing is now available in the Images API using > > getServingUrl. > > - Users can now serve custom static error pages for over_quota, > > dos_api_denial and default cases. > > - Results of datastore count() queries and offsets for all datastore > > queries are no longer capped at 1000. > > - Added a pause queue button to the task queue details page in the Admin > > Console. > > - Historical graphs have been added to all of the dashboard graphs in the > > Admin Console. > > - Content-range headers are supported on Blobstore downloads. > > - New method to allocate datastore ids in a given range: > > allocateIdRange() > > - The app.yaml format is supported with Java applications. > > - Increased several rate limited quotas for free applications. > > - Fixed an issue that did not allow forms of over 200,000 bytes to be > > submitted. > > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=1608 > > > Python 1.3.6 > > > - Multitenancy is now supported in the datastore, allowing better > > compartmentalization of user data. > > - Automatic image thumbnailing is now available in the Images API using > > get_serving_url(). > > - Users can now serve custom static error pages for over_quota, > > dos_api_denial and default cases. > > - Results of datastore count() queries and offsets for all datastore > > queries are no longer capped at 1000. > > - Added a pause queue button to the task queue details page in the Admin > > Console. > > - Historical graphs have been added to all of the dashboard graphs in the > > Admin Console. > > - Content-range headers are supported on Blobstore downloads. > > - Remote API now supports the Blobstore API. > > - New method to allocate datastore ids in a given range: > > db.allocate_id_range(). > > - New db method is_in_transaction() determines if a transaction is still > > open. > > - Increased several rate limited quotas for free applications. > > - Fixed an issue in db.py where unindexed property lists for > > user-specified property names were ignored. > > - Fixed an issue where the task queue uses local time instead of UTC time > > to compute job ETA. > > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=2508 > > - Fixed an issue in the SDK with datastore cursors being too large. > > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=3152 > > > -- > > Ikai Lan > > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > > Blog:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com > > Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine > > Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine -- 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-appeng...@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: How to write a C# client to access google app engine?
I'm not sure what you're talking about with respect to decoding the Webservice, but my application uses a c# client to access it. Here is the c# code where it accesses it: HttpWebRequest req = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create(url); req.Method = "GET"; req.KeepAlive = false; using (var respstream = req.GetResponse().GetResponseStream()) return respstream.ReadFully(); ReadFully is just an extension method that fully reads a stream. Hope this helps! On Aug 18, 4:13 pm, Vassili wrote: > Thanks for the link. > So is it so hidden? Has anyone been able to decode the Webservice > beyond the default project created with the Eclipse plugin? -- 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-appeng...@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] Security exception using the new getServingUrl capabilities on dev server
getServingUrl works fine, returning a url of http://localhost:8080/_ah/img/sxO56aAM_qVlARX4ym61bQ, but when i navigate my browser to that url i get a security exception: any ideas how to fix this, or is it a dev server bug? Aug 18, 2010 8:14:45 PM com.google.apphosting.utils.jetty.JettyLogger warn [java] WARNING: /_ah/img/sxO56aAM_qVlARX4ym61bQ [java] java.lang.SecurityException: Unable to create temporary file [java] at java.io.File.checkAndCreate(File.java:1701) [java] at java.io.File.createTempFile(File.java:1793) [java] at javax.imageio.stream.FileCacheImageInputStream.(FileCacheImageInputStream.java: 80) [java] at com.sun.imageio.spi.InputStreamImageInputStreamSpi.createInputStreamInstance(InputStreamImageInputStreamSpi.java: 51) [java] at javax.imageio.ImageIO.createImageInputStream(ImageIO.java:331) [java] at javax.imageio.ImageIO.read(ImageIO.java:1325) [java] at com.google.appengine.api.images.dev.LocalImagesService.openImage(LocalImagesService.java: 230) [java] at com.google.appengine.api.images.dev.LocalBlobImageServlet.transformImage(LocalBlobImageServlet.java: 211) [java] at com.google.appengine.api.images.dev.LocalBlobImageServlet.doGet(LocalBlobImageServlet.java: 47) [java] at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:693) [java] at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:806) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHolder.handle(ServletHolder.java:511) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1166) [java] at AC.ACFilter.doFilter(ACFilter.java:93) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1157) [java] at com.google.appengine.tools.appstats.AppstatsFilter.doFilter(AppstatsFilter.java: 140) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1157) [java] at com.google.appengine.api.blobstore.dev.ServeBlobFilter.doFilter(ServeBlobFilter.java: 58) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1157) [java] at com.google.apphosting.utils.servlet.TransactionCleanupFilter.doFilter(TransactionCleanupFilter.java: 43) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1157) [java] at com.google.appengine.tools.development.StaticFileFilter.doFilter(StaticFileFilter.java: 122) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler $CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1157) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.handle(ServletHandler.java: 388) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java: 216) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.SessionHandler.handle(SessionHandler.java: 182) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.ContextHandler.handle(ContextHandler.java: 765) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.handle(WebAppContext.java:418) [java] at com.google.apphosting.utils.jetty.DevAppEngineWebAppContext.handle(DevAppEngineWebAppContext.java: 70) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java: 152) [java] at com.google.appengine.tools.development.JettyContainerService $ApiProxyHandler.handle(JettyContainerService.java:349) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java: 152) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.Server.handle(Server.java: 326) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handleRequest(HttpConnection.java: 542) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection $RequestHandler.headerComplete(HttpConnection.java:923) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:547) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseAvailable(HttpParser.java:212) [java] at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handle(HttpConnection.java:404) [java] at org.mortbay.io.nio.SelectChannelEndPoint.run(SelectChannelEndPoint.java: 409) [java] at org.mortbay.thread.QueuedThreadPool $PoolThread.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:582) -- 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-appeng...@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: SDK 1.3.6 released!
Thank you App Engine Team! I had been struggling with how I would get a decent solution for displaying lots of thumbnail images on one page, and with this release and the getServingUrl function, it seems like my problems are solved! On Aug 17, 2:19 pm, "Ikai L (Google)" wrote: > Hey guys, > > This is just a heads up that App Engine SDK version 1.3.6 is officially > released! Read more about it here: > > http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2010/08/multi-tenancy-support-hig... > > Release notes are below: > > Java 1.3.6 > > - Multitenancy is now supported in the datastore, allowing better > compartmentalization of user data. > - Automatic image thumbnailing is now available in the Images API using > getServingUrl. > - Users can now serve custom static error pages for over_quota, > dos_api_denial and default cases. > - Results of datastore count() queries and offsets for all datastore > queries are no longer capped at 1000. > - Added a pause queue button to the task queue details page in the Admin > Console. > - Historical graphs have been added to all of the dashboard graphs in the > Admin Console. > - Content-range headers are supported on Blobstore downloads. > - New method to allocate datastore ids in a given range: > allocateIdRange() > - The app.yaml format is supported with Java applications. > - Increased several rate limited quotas for free applications. > - Fixed an issue that did not allow forms of over 200,000 bytes to be > submitted. > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=1608 > > Python 1.3.6 > > - Multitenancy is now supported in the datastore, allowing better > compartmentalization of user data. > - Automatic image thumbnailing is now available in the Images API using > get_serving_url(). > - Users can now serve custom static error pages for over_quota, > dos_api_denial and default cases. > - Results of datastore count() queries and offsets for all datastore > queries are no longer capped at 1000. > - Added a pause queue button to the task queue details page in the Admin > Console. > - Historical graphs have been added to all of the dashboard graphs in the > Admin Console. > - Content-range headers are supported on Blobstore downloads. > - Remote API now supports the Blobstore API. > - New method to allocate datastore ids in a given range: > db.allocate_id_range(). > - New db method is_in_transaction() determines if a transaction is still > open. > - Increased several rate limited quotas for free applications. > - Fixed an issue in db.py where unindexed property lists for > user-specified property names were ignored. > - Fixed an issue where the task queue uses local time instead of UTC time > to compute job ETA. > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=2508 > - Fixed an issue in the SDK with datastore cursors being too large. > -http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=3152 > > -- > Ikai Lan > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > Blog:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com > Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine > Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine -- 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-appeng...@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] Can't edit datastore entity in Control panel if entity has a ShortBlob
On the appspot.com admin control panel, I can't edit a datastore entity if it has a ShortBlob property. When trying to edit it, the shortblob is shown in an editable textbox as ��,�:3�. When trying to save the entity, I get a page that says, "A server error has occurred.". This happens when making any change to the entity, even if I don't touch the ShortBlob property. -- 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-appeng...@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] Am I allowed to do this?
I want to use 2 apps for my website. The first app would run the website, and second app would be a bunch of random functions exposed by an api. The reason I don't want to lump it into one app is because I want to cleanly separate the code of the random functions and the code that runs the website. Also I plan to very rarely update the first app, but update the random functions relatively frequently, and I don't want to have to worry about breaking something in the website when I update the functions. The first app's software is like a wiki website, and the second app provides widgets that can be embedded in the wiki pages. I'm not doing this to try to get more free quota, I'm completely fine with paying. Is this allowed? Since two apps are basically being used for just one website? -- 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-appeng...@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: Programmatic access the logs
I agree programmatic access to logs would be super useful. I opened an issue specifically asking for this. http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=2953 . Please star it to increase its exposure. -- 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-appeng...@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: How reliable are the App Engine Logs?
Ahh, didn't think about disabling the indexing on all columns, thats a good idea! On Mar 11, 8:11 am, vivpuri wrote: > I have experienced that Logger.info() logs dont always show up in the > logs when viewed via Admin Console after few mins. Note, my app goes > through lot of requests in short amount of time, hence the time span > is minutes. For lesser number of requests, it might be longer time > span that Logger.info() info shows up. Logger.error() do seem to stick > around. Also, to optimize writes, you can disable indexing on all > columns, if you dont need them. -- 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-appeng...@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] How reliable are the App Engine Logs?
I'm wondering how reliable are the app engine logs? If I call
Logger.info("something"), and the call succeeds, will the entry
definitely show up in the logs? Or might it sometimes silently fail?
I have some data I have to persist with every request, but I will only
read the data once, about 30 minutes later by an offsite computer.
Since the datastore is optimized for read efficiency, rather than
write efficiency, this makes it a bad candidate for this need.
I'm wondering if simply logging the data would work. I can
Logger.info() the data I need to persist with every request, and my
offsite computer can download the logs every 30 minutes.
--
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-appeng...@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: Application deployment time
My cold start time for helloWorld is 1.5 seconds. If I add JDO to
that, it adds an additional 5-6 seconds for me on the first use of
JDO.
On Mar 6, 12:55 am, Francois MASUREL wrote:
> Here is what I get when I deploy my webapp with a very basic web.xml
> containing only one HelloWorldServelt, no filters and no listeners.
>
> I still get a 9-10 seconds deploying time :
>
> 03-06 12:54AM 35.471 /helloworld 200 9558ms 3966cpu_ms 0kb Mozilla/5.0
> (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko)
> Chrome/5.0.342.1 Safari/533.2,gzip(gfe)
>
> 86.205.156.225 - f.masurel [06/Mar/2010:00:54:45 -0800] "GET
> /helloworld HTTP/1.1" 200 11 - "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT
> 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/5.0.342.1
> Safari/533.2,gzip(gfe)"
>
> 03-06 12:43AM 01.518 /helloworld 200 8908ms 3927cpu_ms 0kb Mozilla/5.0
> (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko)
> Chrome/5.0.342.1 Safari/533.2,gzip(gfe)
>
> 86.205.156.225 - f.masurel [06/Mar/2010:00:43:10 -0800] "GET
> /helloworld HTTP/1.1" 200 11 - "Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT
> 6.0; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/5.0.342.1
> Safari/533.2,gzip(gfe)"
>
> So deploying time seems to be proportional to the global size of
> code/librairies you deploy even if this code is never called.
>
> For you information, here is my HelloWorldServlet service method :
>
> public void service(HttpServletRequest req, HttpServletResponse res)
> throws ServletException, IOException {
> res.getWriter().print("Hello World");
> }
>
> And here is my web.xml :
>
>
>
>
> HelloWorldServlet
> com.mably.cms.web.HelloWorldServlet
>
>
>
> HelloWorldServlet
> /helloworld
>
>
>
>
> index.html
> index.jsp
>
>
>
>
> If anybody at Google have some hints about that, they're welcome.
>
> My "simplified" testing app has ID "i-wands".
>
> François Masurel
>
> Le 2 mars 2010 11:48, François Masurel a écrit :
>
>
>
> > Ok, thanx for your answer.
>
> > I'll make a test with a simple Hello World servlet with no
> > dependencies and see how it goes.
>
> > I guess I also need to disable servlet filters and context
> > listeners...
>
> > On 1 mar, 18:27, Wooble wrote:
> > > I think you're confusing deploying with cold startup.
>
> > > Static files won't affect startup time (they will affect deployment,
> > > of course, since you need to upload any that have changed); servlets
> > > needing to load lots of jars and classes to do something simple will
> > > make that simple thing take a long time.
>
> > > On Mar 1, 9:21 am, François Masurel wrote:
>
> > > > There seems to be an incompressible deploying time, even if you access
> > > > a pretty simple page in GAE.
>
> > > > In my case, a pretty basic servlet making a simple read in the
> > > > datastore can take as much as 15s to load.
>
> > > > My web.xml is pretty basic too, only one filter : I'm doing the
> > > > servlet lazy-loading myself coz I reached the "100 URLMap entries"
> > > > limit.
>
> > > > So I guess my application should load pretty quickly, isn't it ?
>
> > > > What am I doing wrong ? Is the application global weight (classes,
> > > > jar, static files) is to take into account for the deploying time ?
>
> > > > Thanx for your answers.
>
> > > > Francois Masurel
> > > > Bordeaux, FRANCE
>
> > --
> > 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-appeng...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > e...@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 post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@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: Lock the memcache and how to block the call ?
The idea of a cache is that at any time it could be out of date. Trying to synchronize wouldn't be the intended purpose of a cache I don't think. -- 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-appeng...@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] Does starting up a new instance cause the user to wait for it to initialize?
If I could get a definitive answer on this that would be great. I know that when your Google App Engine (GAE) app has 0 instances running (because it has been idle for a bit), and a user requests a page, the user has to wait for the instance to boot up and do all of the instantiation which can cause the user to wait a significant amount of time. My question is about the situation when your GAE app already has 1 instance running, but begins to experience heavy load and starts booting up a second instance. In this case, which will happen: 1. Will a user end up having to wait for the second instance to instantiate before getting their request responded to? 2. Will no requests be sent to the second instance until it has fully instantiated, thus not making a user wait an extended amount of time? If the answer is number 1, then there will always be some users who have to wait an unreasonable amount of time to get there request responded to. Especially in my case since I use Spring, Spring Security, and JDO. And JDO takes about 5 seconds to initialize, Spring takes about 2 seconds, and Spring Security takes about 1 second. -- 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-appeng...@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] Will having at least one app instance running guarantee no user will get a loading request?
As long as there is at least one app instance running will that guarantee another user won't get a loading request? My loading requests take like 10 seconds to initialize Spring, Spring Security, and JDO. I don't want any of my users to experience a 10 second wait. The docs say that once there is a steady stream of traffic then your instance won't be shut down. What about when there is a surge in traffic and a second instance is going online, will that cause a loading request for a user? -- 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-appeng...@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] Does starting up a new instance cause the user to wait for it to initialize?
I know that when your app has 0 instances running (because it has been idle for a bit), and a user requests a page, the user has to wait for the instance to boot up and do all of the instantiation which can cause the user to wait a significant amount of time. My question is about the situation when your app already has 1 instance running, but begins to experience heavy load and starts booting up a second instance. In this case, will a user end up having to wait for the second instance to instantiate before getting their request responded to? Or will no requests be sent to the second instance until it has fully instantiated, thus not making a user wait an extended amount of time? -- 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-appeng...@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.
