Re: [google-appengine] Keep it short: Who is forced to leave GAE?
I'm in exactly the same position as Peter Petrov. I moved months ago once it was clear from Greg that there was no going back, and I'm never coming back to GAE. The constraints, prior to the pricing changes, were already painful and the trade-off wasn't always attractive. The new pricing was the straw that broke this camel's back. Luckily there have been a host of new Python PaaS providers since then, I'm now with DotCloud.com and couldn't be happier. The biggest advantage is that they operate on a standard stack so there is very little lock-in. Adieu GAE. On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Peter Petrov onest...@gmail.com wrote: I've already left GAE a couple of months ago. I.e. immediately after Greg replied to me that new pricing will come into effect before Python 2.7 and multithreading. My app has short bursts of thousands QPS, and without multithreading it was clear to me that for an unknown period I'd have to pay a very high price. Today's posts here prove that I was right. Another reason was the insanely high price for instance hours - more than 10x the industry average. Sorry Google, but your servers are not made of gold. Paying that price is simply stupid, and I'm not stupid. I've moved to a small VPS cluster at RackSpace Cloud. I rewrote my entire app as a Node.js application (previously was GAE/Python using Kay). Very happy so far, I don't think I'll ever return to GAE. On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Raymond C. windz...@gmail.com wrote: I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE users). I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state the monthly price change as well. And what options you are considering? -- 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/-/MDdHgnCrDecJ. 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] So Tell Me About GO
The value of a language is more than just the language core and standard libraries. It's also in the ecosystem around the language. Python has an awesome ecosystem around it and a decent chunk of packages can run unmodified on App Engine (though some key packages can't run on GAE). Deciding to rewrite your code from scratch is no small undertaking. It's sad that you're forced to consider this. I think Java is a better bet at this point. There's no telling when GAE's Go will have the single-thread restrictions lifted. Plus, the ecosystem around Java is arguably much larger than that around Go. saidimu On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote: I learned Python specifically for working on GAE. I reasonably suck at the language but it had advantages of reduced overhead which I thought would make it the ideal choice for GAE and enterprise class deployments where 5% increase in performance meant 5% on my bottom line. Everything I read says that GO is great for multi-threaded Applications. Awesome! Then you read the Google bits: The Go runtime environment for App Engine provides full support for goroutines, but not for parallel execution: goroutines are scheduled onto a single operating system thread. This single-thread restriction may be lifted in future versions. So…. Do I port my python app to Java knowing I get multi-thread and can save a crap ton of money on instances when the new pricing hits? Or do I port my code to GO expecting that it will be the multi-thread homerun that it is on other platforms? OR…(highly unlikely) Do I hope that GAE makes the instances smaller and cheaper when running python so that I can get $.02 per hour instances that are 1 4th the size so they run at 100% cpu instead of 25% cpu? Essentially I’m asking “It appears in the new paradigm pricing was optimized for Java, is this the case or is it optimized for GO and Java just gets the benefits right now, or is Python really what GAE was born for and will it come back to being the cost favorite?” -Brandon -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] What do you want to see answered in Greg's pricing FAQ?
Thanks for the collection of links, very useful. Hacker News isn't the fount of wisdom it once was (if its mythology is to be believed), but here's the money quote from a Hacker News thread: I guess I felt that my implicit feelings on App Engine were something like, Hey hackers! You should totally rewrite your apps for our Google systems that are a lot more efficient than other systems. Yeah, there are some annoying restrictions that you'll have to get used to and are totally a pain for some things. Still, out service is cheap for loads of usage and really cheap even after that so you're spending a little programmer time for no-hassle-scaling and cheaper hosting than anything you can get! However, they've consistently lowered the free usage tier to being a fraction of what it once was, they're now charging a ton more with their instance-hour model compared to the old CPU based model, a bit of the reliability/scaling sheen has worn off as it's had problems, other competitors have been aggressively entering this space, and you still have to alter your apps specifically for their architecture. I'm not saying that App Engine doesn't have value, just that it feels very different. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2533898 saidimu On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Vanni Totaro vanni.tot...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Greg, no FAQ from you yet... so in the meanwhile here it is a list of links you (and Ikai, Nick, Justin, etc.) should visit to know what gae users said in the last couple of days about pricing news. GAE Forum topics: http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FVCYbRH4WWBI%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2Fig3iefPvvzc%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2F8qFRSYBCXUs%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FI34-L5CFCTM%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FD-9KTCKlADk%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FxwCz5MF_zpw%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FavsuoqrJXu8%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FS1VY_7M9RZg%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2F48RZl_m2uG0%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2F6DLRc1GXNYY%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FHs9iLKB6sUM%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FnevG0iZ9WHw%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2F_l06D9uBZpI%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2FdH_LmXNAL9k%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/python-forum.html?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine-python%2FOUexOoyjnak%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/java-forum.html?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine-java%2F1jfPXqdz_LA%2Fdiscussion http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/java-forum.html?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine-java%2F8ulE2tOW-Co%2Fdiscussion GAE Blog comments: http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/05/year-ahead-for-google-app-engine.html http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/05/app-engine-150-release.html http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/05/app-engine-at-io-2011-day-2.html Hacker News comments: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2533416 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2533413 Reddit comments: http://www.reddit.com/r/AppEngine/comments/h8sue/rip_appengine_xpost_from_rpython/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/h8stj/rip_appengine/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AppEngine/comments/h8971/new_app_engine_pricing_what_do_you_think/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AppEngine/comments/h86jq/go_app_engine/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AppEngine/comments/h8ib4/app_engine_150_released/ Regards, Vanni -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: So Tell Me About GO
But you still can't serve 1 request at a time. So the single-thread restriction is very relevant. On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Robert Smart robert.kenneth.sm...@gmail.com wrote: If you look at the go docs it looks like it only supports sync ops on urlfetch/datastore/etc. However when one of these ops is started then other goroutines start running. And the goroutines can send messages to each other. So go provides the only language-native async system for gae. Rob Pike claims that this is a good way to think about async operations. There isn't much CPU involved usually, so the restriction to 1 thread is really irrelevant most of the time. However you'd need to be very brave to go for go when we haven't even seen a draft of how they plan to do transactions and channels. Or have we? -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Is App Engine suddenly becoming more expensive???
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 1:15 AM, stevep prosse...@gmail.com wrote: On May 11, 9:57 am, Geoffrey Spear geoffsp...@gmail.com wrote: For Python applications, yes, a single request takes up all of the resources of an instance for the time it's being handled. Java instances with threading enabled can handle multiple requests. Fundamentally (although the clothes are still in the wash, not on the line) the old cpu-based resource charge was fair. Unless something drastic changes, the new instance charge model appears heavily, very heavily prejudiced against Python. Egregious in the extreme. Making a decision so unfavorable to one group is weird. Likely so weird that GAE should stop with justifications. Maybe it all works out, but this looks just so weird, so very weird to me. Why punish Python developers?? If we read between the lines, as we must since concrete info from Google is so scarce, it appears Python's status in App Engine is very slowly being diminished. Google clearly would prefer to see Go as the main language runtime (since they created the language), hence the push to have Go be battle-tested by developers (who will then get screwed when the rug gets pulled out under them sometime in the future). Java is also probably not completely safe, at least not given's Oracle's ownership and aggressive moves wrt Google/Android. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Is App Engine suddenly becoming more expensive???
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Vinuth Madinur vinuth.madi...@gmail.comwrote: Darien, I don't think that was the basic premise for cloud computing services. This has always been a new business opportunity than sharing unused computing. http://www.quora.com/How-and-why-did-Amazon-get-into-the-cloud-computing-business Here Werner Vogels http://www.quora.com/Werner-Vogels CTO of Amazon explicitly refutes this myth. Suppose it was true that Amazon had excess capacity they wanted to lease out. Do you think the CTO would publicly admit that? Most likely not. Unless it comes from a source with no conflict of interest, I'd take the info with a grain of salt. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Is App Engine suddenly becoming more expensive???
Since trust wasn't one of the metrics tracked on the dashboard, it appears the GAE team forgot how much of a factor it is. It does not always follow that if it can't be measured then it doesn't exist. I think the GAE team's actions have clearly demonstrated that developers are *not* their core constituency, they have their sights set on another target (quite possibly those who would have been interested in GAE4B). Message of The Day (from GAE): developers are expendable, but you're stuck with us. So deal. Amazon had its (technical) meltdown that lasted 3+ days. App Engine is having its (trust) meltdown. I wonder how long this one will last. I, for one, have started migrating my python apps to use Django-nonrel APIs. Coding directly against Google APIs is turning out to be a very bad idea. saidimu On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 2:18 PM, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote: This has the potential become a breach of trust that will never be forgotten/forgiven by the developer community. There are lots of man- years devoted to the platform, based on trust and belief that the essential value proposition will not suddenly change (by an order of magnitude!!). One action can indelibly destroy trust. Think about that. You might permanently lose the trust of developers. Bloggers will always note, Yes, your business or school can start using Google Apps. But Google has suddenly raised pricing in the past, and you must assume they will do it again. Or Yes, Android is free right now. But Google has broken trust with developers before. Ballmer must be sharpening his tongue with witticism on the topic of, Do no Evil So please, be careful with this move. johnP On May 11, 10:57 am, Philip philip.mates...@driggle.com wrote: Hi Greg, suppose there will be an issue with the python runtime resulting in very high latencies for a period of time, do we have to pay for the extra instances that are needed? The instances chart on the dashboard does also contain active instances, can we orientate at that number (+-10%) for the new scheduling algorithm? Thanks for any answer. On May 11, 7:46 pm, Gregory D'alesandre gr...@google.com wrote: On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Vinuth Madinur vinuth.madi...@gmail.comwrote: Important concerns raised on the blog comment: Quoting @Deep Due to customer feedback and to better service memory intensive applications, we will be eliminating CPU hours. I can't imagine anyone actually requested this. That's corporate bs for we are making this unpopular change but going to pretend customers requested it. Hi Vinuth, I can imagine how it sounds like corporate bs, but in reality with the current CPU-only based model, we have a number of limitations that many potential customers were unhappy about. High latency apps essentially hold on to lots of memory without any CPU usage, this means that we can't scale it because it would just continue to gobble up more memory unbounded. Under the new model any app can scale, but will be paying for the memory as well as the cpu used, this opens App Engine up to a number of developers/applications that weren't able to use it before and wanted to. Instead, our serving infrastructure will charge for the number of Instances running As companies age, they start looking for ways to make free money without actual work. (Think of the big banks.) Sad to see signs Google is going that way. If this move results in charging even for instances sitting idly (while we don't even have direct control over the # of instances!) that would be a pretty big change from no evil. My app has light load and is set to multithreaded yet AE keeps spawning new instances for no reason. I refuse to pay for those. This is why we are working on our scheduler, even idle instances cost resources, not CPU but essentially the opportunity cost of other applications that could run but can't because the idle instance is taking up space. Our goal is to only run the number of instances you need for your traffic. I hope that helps! Greg These instances will be similar to the instances you can see in the Admin Console today with the exception that we will be improving our scheduler to ensure each instance has an appropriate level of utilization. Make the scheduler calculate costs based on CPU usage and I might stay. If you try to charge me for idle CPU cycles (in whichever instance) I can't see any reason not to just rent a VM instead. That's the point when Google loses any advantage over VMs. /Quote On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:37 PM, stevep prosse...@gmail.com wrote: My $0.02 cents (old model, $0.08 new Google estimate, $1.00 other user estimates). Having done a lot of work in finance for a large tech company, my main
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Is App Engine suddenly becoming more expensive???
To be clear, prices will be higher, but I've seen people quoting number such as 70x higher which should not be the case. Once we have the changes to the scheduler done as well as the comparative bills, you'll then be able to see how much it will actually cost. We could've waited until that point to talk about this but we wanted to give as much advance notice as possible. The core of the message is, essentially: trust us on the (opaque) scheduler we're working on. You're asking devs to trust the GAE team, right in the middle of a discussion that is essentially about a breach of trust (real or perceived). -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Massive EC2 outage
I've been there and I'm happy to leave this job to the professionals. It sure helps that you have a batphone to the GAE datastore team. Or is that a different Jeff Schnitzer? saidimu On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: Easy to say, not so easy to do :-) All that frantic running-around-in-panic that GAE engineers and ops people do when something goes wonky inside the datastore? That would be you right now, trying to figure out how to failover your database (and any other persistent data) to a different datacenter... and then when the original comes back up you get to merge any lost transactions. I've been there and I'm happy to leave this job to the professionals. Jeff On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Derrick Schneider derrick.schnei...@gmail.com wrote: While it's certainly unfortunate for companies that have bet on EC2, they'd be smarter to distribute their servers a bit so that a single data center outage does not take out their entire company. On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: I'm not suggesting schadenfreude here, but for all those folks doubting the viability of appengine for reliability reasons: http://eu.techcrunch.com/2011/04/21/amazon-ec2-goes-down-taking-with-it-reddit-foursquare-and-quora/ Amazon's North Virginia datacenter tripped and fell over in the early AM this morning, and several major sites (Foursquare and Quora) are still down more than *eight hours* later. Ouch. You can read the gory details here: http://status.aws.amazon.com/ Jeff -- 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. -- Writer. Programmer. Puzzle Designer. http://www.obsessionwithfood.com -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Massive EC2 outage
It's just a matter of time before GAE has another major outage. Will that materially change your decision to be on GAE? I don't think it should; the cloud is young and reliability is not (yet, if ever) at dial-tone reliability. saidimu On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Calvin calvin.r...@gmail.com wrote: Schadenfreude was exactly the word I was going to use when I considered posting this news. I love that word. I've got to say that I feel really good after reading the outage postmortem yesterday and then hearing this news this morning. Whenever there's an App Engine outage, or increase in error rate, it seems really dire to us because we get a lot of people charging to this forum to alert people to the outage. But yesterday's postmortem explained that while the March 8th outage lasted a while, it didn't effect everyone, and Google was aware of the problem pretty quickly. For me the bottom line is that I'd rather have a Googler's pager go off when there's a problem than have to set up elaborate failsafes on EC2. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Massive EC2 outage
FWIW, here's DotCloud's take on the outage which is still affecting them: http://blog.dotcloud.com/working-around-the-ec2-outage saidimu On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM, saidimu apale said...@gmail.com wrote: It sure helps that you have a batphone to the GAE datastore team. Or is that a different Jeff Schnitzer? Don't interpret that too literally. A couple of the Google developers have been receptive to some api changes that would make Objectify work better (Future interception, and a way to expose entity version timestamps) but my apps run on the same hardware yours does. When I have production questions, I post them here. Jeff -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Can't access datastore viewer, cant access via remote_api
The issues listed below have the same root cause as yours; please star them: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4374 http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4671 Don't hold your breath on a quick solution; there has been zero communication on an ETA. I switched back to the Master-Slave datastore primarily because of this. Given how strongly the HR datastore was pushed on this list, I'm surprised at how this escaped the QA process. saidimu On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:19 AM, Andrin von Rechenberg andri...@gmail.comwrote: Hi there I deleted about 1mio entities in the datastore... and now I have a problem: Whenever I click on Datastore Viewer in the appengine dashboard, I get a HTTP 500. The remote API spits out: *BadRequestError: app s~miumeet-hr cannot access app miumeet-hr's data* The (s~...) is because it's a HR app. * * Any help is highly appreciated! AppID: miumeet-hr -Andrin -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine
Here's a tantalizing prospect on the advent of private PaaS in a blog post by RightScale, on Cloud Foundry's potential. I am watching Cloud Foundry very closely, if it matures well (a big 'if') then I'm definitely jumping the GAE ship. The possibilities of choosing a PaaS provider *and* a IaaS provider are simply too attractive. Imagine running your GAE app on Amazon's IaaS, running on the exact-same GAE PaaS software. Good times ahead! http://blog.rightscale.com/2011/04/12/launch-vmwares-cloudfoundry-paas-using-rightscale/ Until now the notion of PaaS has lumped together the author of the PaaS software and its operator. For example, Heroku developed its PaaS software and also offers it as a service. If you want to run your application on Heroku your only choice is to sign-up to their service and have them run your app. Google AppEngine has the same properties. All this is very nice and has many benefits, but it doesn’t fit all use-cases by a long shot. What if you need to run your app in Brazil but Heroku and your PaaS service doesn’t operate there? Or if you need to run your app within the corporate firewall? Or if you want to add some custom hooks to the PaaS software so you can punch out to custom services that are co-located with your app? All these options become a reality with Cloud Foundry because the PaaS software is developed as an open-source project. You can customize it and you can run it where you want to and how you want. Of course you can also go to a hosted Cloud Foundry service whenever you don’t want to be bothered running servers. This could be a public Cloud Foundry service that is in effect competing with Heroku, AppEngine and others, but it could also be a private service offered by IT or your friendly devops team mate. This opens the possibilities for departmental PaaS services that may have a relatively small scale and can be tailored for the specific needs of their users. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote: To be fair... It's more like the partner in the restaurant saying, you have to use Canola oil, instead of Peanut Oil because we think there is less risk. So your fries won't taste as good, we're fronting the money, so you do it our way. To draw out that analogy a little farther, we'd have to add the fact that you're also a MD-PhD who spent the last 10 years researching heart disease, and the partner is someone who has read a few articles on the Huffington Post. :-) Jeff -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine
GEO distribution as a reason for serving from the cloud is rendered void by the performance of the big players infrastructure. Raw performance isn't the only relevant metric when it comes to geo distribution. Legal jurisdiction is a huge factor for some, especially if some government (the US) decides to seize domains or force infrastructure providers to drop clients. Lack of IaaS-vendor lock-in is another huge reason (the ability to switch IaaS providers while still maintaining the same PaaS code). As the article states, the current PaaS market tightly integrates PaaS-provider and IaaS-provider. Decoupling this is a win-win-win situation for developers/VCs/managers etc etc. On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote: You ever raced GAE from brazil, against a Brazilian hosting Provider? I was seeing latency differences of about 30ms. GEO distribution as a reason for serving from the cloud is rendered void by the performance of the big players infrastructure. *From:* google-appengine@googlegroups.com [mailto: google-appengine@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *saidimu apale *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2011 9:59 AM *To:* google-appengine@googlegroups.com *Subject:* Re: [google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine Here's a tantalizing prospect on the advent of private PaaS in a blog post by RightScale, on Cloud Foundry's potential. I am watching Cloud Foundry very closely, if it matures well (a big 'if') then I'm definitely jumping the GAE ship. The possibilities of choosing a PaaS provider *and* a IaaS provider are simply too attractive. Imagine running your GAE app on Amazon's IaaS, running on the exact-same GAE PaaS software. Good times ahead! http://blog.rightscale.com/2011/04/12/launch-vmwares-cloudfoundry-paas-using-rightscale/ Until now the notion of PaaS has lumped together the author of the PaaS software and its operator. For example, Heroku developed its PaaS software and also offers it as a service. If you want to run your application on Heroku your only choice is to sign-up to their service and have them run your app. Google AppEngine has the same properties. All this is very nice and has many benefits, but it doesn’t fit all use-cases by a long shot. What if you need to run your app in Brazil but Heroku and your PaaS service doesn’t operate there? Or if you need to run your app within the corporate firewall? Or if you want to add some custom hooks to the PaaS software so you can punch out to custom services that are co-located with your app? All these options become a reality with Cloud Foundry because the PaaS software is developed as an open-source project. You can customize it and you can run it where you want to and how you want. Of course you can also go to a hosted Cloud Foundry service whenever you don’t want to be bothered running servers. This could be a public Cloud Foundry service that is in effect competing with Heroku, AppEngine and others, but it could also be a private service offered by IT or your friendly devops team mate. This opens the possibilities for departmental PaaS services that may have a relatively small scale and can be tailored for the specific needs of their users. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote: To be fair... It's more like the partner in the restaurant saying, you have to use Canola oil, instead of Peanut Oil because we think there is less risk. So your fries won't taste as good, we're fronting the money, so you do it our way. To draw out that analogy a little farther, we'd have to add the fact that you're also a MD-PhD who spent the last 10 years researching heart disease, and the partner is someone who has read a few articles on the Huffington Post. :-) Jeff -- 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. -- 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. -- 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
[google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine
[a repost of my private reply to Jeff Schnitzer's just-reposted private response] -- Forwarded message -- From: saidimu apale said...@gmail.com Date: Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:46 PM Subject: Re: [google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine To: Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org Not sure if you meant that as a private reply, I'll assume so and reply privately as well. I think this is begging the question. You only feel that GAE has innumerable gotchas because you are unfamiliar with it. I've been working with appengine (both java and python) intensively for about 1.5 years now and it *very* rarely surprises me. It is a truism that the more familiar you are with a system the less it will trip you up; GAE is no exception. The issue is the depth of familiarity required to avoid most gotchas, and the nature of those gotchas to begin with. Some gotchas are just unacceptable, whatever the experience level. Some other gotchas are present regardless of your experience levels: - the python app deployment tool *not* supporting two-factor authentication: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4777 - the HR datastore appending an s~ to the appid, breaking a lot of commandline tools: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4671 and http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4374 - a very serious issue with Google's edge caches not implementing headers correctly: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4277 - lack of DKIM anti-spam implementation on outgoing emails: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=3161 Not all issues are gotchas, but a disconcerting number of issues simply should *not* be there, regardless of one's experience level. If Google offers email services and url-shortening services, is it unreasonable to expect that they would internally implement known anti-spam measures? At the very least, they should prominently mention the lack of such measures in the docs on email. FWIW, I have intensively used GAE for about the same time as you have, so it isn't an experience issue. Ease-of-use and rapid development, at least compared to EC2, was a major attraction to GAE, hence my disappointment. saidimu -- 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: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine
Interesting that VMWare launches CloudFoundry http://cloudfoundry.com/ right in the midst of this vigorous discussion on GAE and the cloud. It remains to be seen what their impact will be, but I wonder if in a few years' time GAE will rue the missed chances. Only time will tell. saidimu -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Startup Weekend and Google App Engine
Aren't you strengthening the argument that GAE gets in the way of execution by its beta/uncertain nature and its innumerable gotchas (which is what I think some are contending)? saidimu PS I'm surprised Wave hasn't been mentioned in this discussion. It always comes up in such discussions. On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: At risk of dragging this on... Ask any VC what they think about the relative merits of Idea and Execution. Or ask Google: http://www.google.com/search?q=idea+vs+execution Jeff On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Darien Caldwell darien.caldw...@gmail.com wrote: Frankly this whole argument is silly. Apple started with something they cobbled together themselves from spare parts. Google started with their own proprietary software, BackRub, which was written in Java and Python and ran on Linux. They didn't have anyone to help them, and they succeeded. Anyone using GAE, AWS, or anything period, has just as much a chance to succeed, or fail, based on the merit of their *idea*. It's the destination that is important, quibbling over how you get there is non-productive. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Google two-factor authentication and App Engine
The Python command-line (appcfg.py) also has this incredibly annoying, and so far unacknowledged, bug. Either this should be considered a serious bug or AppEngine developers should be advised not to turn on two-factor authentication on their development accounts (as users of specific Google TV functions are being advised here: http://www.google.com/support/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=1185133 The AppEngine issue tracker is currently returning a 500 error so I can't search for an existing issue or create a new one. saidimu On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:12 AM, Doug . douglas.lin...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to add the eclipse plugin annoyingly fails to save the key when you use it, and you have to generate a new one each time. I currently I have mine (very securely) written on a post-it note stuck to my monitor. Kind of defeats the point of enabling two-factor auth in the first place. :P ~ Doug. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Google two-factor authentication and App Engine
Please star this issue if it affects you: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4777 http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4777saidimu On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:42 PM, saidimu apale said...@gmail.com wrote: The Python command-line (appcfg.py) also has this incredibly annoying, and so far unacknowledged, bug. Either this should be considered a serious bug or AppEngine developers should be advised not to turn on two-factor authentication on their development accounts (as users of specific Google TV functions are being advised here: http://www.google.com/support/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=1185133 The AppEngine issue tracker is currently returning a 500 error so I can't search for an existing issue or create a new one. saidimu On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:12 AM, Doug . douglas.lin...@gmail.com wrote: I'd like to add the eclipse plugin annoyingly fails to save the key when you use it, and you have to generate a new one each time. I currently I have mine (very securely) written on a post-it note stuck to my monitor. Kind of defeats the point of enabling two-factor auth in the first place. :P ~ Doug. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: PyCrypto and user passwords.
You can generate secure random numbers on AppEngine via os.urandom(n) to get n-bytes suitable for cryptographic use. Try it on shell.appspot.com This issue http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=1055 has more details, especially comments #1 and #4 from a Googler way back in 2009. It appears the GAE implementation of os.urandom is designed for cryptographic use, though there is absolutely no documentation (apart from the comment thread on the issue). Without knowing the details of the GAE implementation, it is hard to tell if it will suit your needs. saidimu On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Dave Peck davep...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone on the App Engine team comment on whether Crypto.Random will ever be available? Did you try to include your own PyCrypto version? No, because you can't. PyCrypto requires native code, and thus must be supported directly by the App Engine team. App Engine *does* provide PyCrypto on production, but it does *not*provide the Crypto.Random submodule. Thus my question: might we ever expect to see it? Thanks, Dave -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: can we assume time is sync across all servers?
It would be interesting if there was an AppEngine app whose sole purpose was to provide a simple API that used your earlier gist to provide a moving average of clock-skew within AppEngine. It could also plot the collected time series as a quick visual guide to time in the AppEngine domain. Anyone interested in co-developing such an app? saidimu PS Ideally we shouldn't have to worry about this, or we should have a ready-made AppEngine API, but alas... On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Calvin calvin.r...@gmail.com wrote: I just discovered a previous invention that's similar to this idea: http://www.adeptus-mechanicus.com/codex/htpdate/htpdate.html They attempt to reduce inaccuracies by averaging multiple sources. I suppose that if you checked three source you could exclude one if it differed wildly from the other two. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: can we assume time is sync across all servers?
I was referring to the absence of an AppEngine clock skew API, not the absence of clock skew. On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Ikai Lan (Google) ika...@google.com wrote: Ideally, we wouldn't have to worry about clock skew period. Clock skew is a fact of life when working with distributed systems. 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 On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:48 AM, saidimu apale said...@gmail.com wrote: It would be interesting if there was an AppEngine app whose sole purpose was to provide a simple API that used your earlier gist to provide a moving average of clock-skew within AppEngine. It could also plot the collected time series as a quick visual guide to time in the AppEngine domain. Anyone interested in co-developing such an app? saidimu PS Ideally we shouldn't have to worry about this, or we should have a ready-made AppEngine API, but alas... On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Calvin calvin.r...@gmail.com wrote: I just discovered a previous invention that's similar to this idea: http://www.adeptus-mechanicus.com/codex/htpdate/htpdate.html They attempt to reduce inaccuracies by averaging multiple sources. I suppose that if you checked three source you could exclude one if it differed wildly from the other two. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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. -- 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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: can we assume time is sync across all servers?
From the gist:
- the difference between the time on AppEngine's proxy servers (as detected
in the response headers) and local time on AppEngine's serving machines.
local_now = datetime.utcnow()
google_time = urlfetch.fetch('http://www.google.com/robots.txt',
method=urlfetch.HEAD)
google_now = datetime.strptime(google_time.headers['date'], '%a, %d %b %Y
%H:%M:%S GMT')
swatch_delta = local_now - google_now
This works if the proxy servers don't also have greatly varying clock-skew,
else the delta can swing in wildly unexpected ways.
saidimu
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ikai Lan (Google) ika...@google.com wrote:
I'm trying to think of a solution that doesn't involve fetching data from a
third party time service, but I'm drawing a blank. How did you detect the
time skew in the first place?
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
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Eric Ka Ka Ng ngk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Gopal, Calvin, and Ikai,
thx all for your sharing. Calvin, your handy script implements Gopal idea
could be very useful to many of us ;)
Ikai, yes, later we could do more testing and sampling, and with Calvin's
script, to log the time (and delta with google time) however, this is not a
problem frequently happen and we are currently busying with some other
application dev tasks, guess it may take some time to log and analyze this
problem, and would keep you posted. just thinking what kinds of 'examples'
we could provide? (you want log? data in DS? script to produce the log /
data? )
btw, how could we explain Brett's data pipelines' talk at 35:50 or i
interpret wrongly? and i believe Gopal, Calvin faced time sync issues and
thus have the idea and implementation to solve this (just me recently aware
about this problem). how much time is off did you experience?
thx a lot!
- eric
On 4 March 2011 03:12, Ikai Lan (Google) ika...@google.com wrote:
Can you provide examples where the time is off by 30 minutes? This seems
incorrect.
There's definitely clock skew, but we're talking milliseconds, seconds or
at worst, worst, worst maybe a minute or two.
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
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Ng Ka Ka Eric ngk...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Raymond,
Just watched the video. Thx for pointing this reference.
I really didnt expect that the machines are not time synced (can be off
for 40mins?!) are there any technical difficulties to sync them? And in
this
case, for whatever reason if we want to record the time when the request is
made into DS, how can we do that?
- eric
Sent from my iPhone
On 2011年3月3日, at 下午6:20, Raymond C. windz...@gmail.com wrote:
According to Brett's data pipelines' talk (
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSDC_TU7rtc, around 35:50), its not
--
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.
--
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.
--
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.
--
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.
--
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.
--
You received this message because you are
Re: [google-appengine] Re: BIlling Settings?
I've also had this same issue for the last 2-3 days. On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 4:07 AM, sarp sarpcen...@gmail.com wrote: We also have this problem. We're exceeding our quotas and can't change our billing settings. It's very frustrating! On Dec 22, 7:01 am, Patrick Twohig patr...@namazustudios.com wrote: Hi, I'm consistently getting an error 500 when trying to adjust my app's billing settings. Anybody else having this problem? Thanks, Patrick. -- Patrick H. Twohig. Namazu Studios P.O. Box 34161 San Diego, CA 92163-4161 -- 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.comgoogle-appengine%2bunsubscr...@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.
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Documentation on AppEngine's caching reverse proxy
If folks discover new attributes of the cache, by experiment, perhaps they could be added there to collect them in one place. Official docs would go a long way in calming the unease of what other critical attributes haven't been discovered experimentally? It appears these docs aren't on the agenda at all so I guess it's all experimental for now. +1 for your idea of collecting them in one place. saidimu On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Stephen sdea...@gmail.com wrote: If you haven't already, star this: http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=2258 If folks discover new attributes of the cache, by experiment, perhaps they could be added there to collect them in one place. -- 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.comgoogle-appengine%2bunsubscr...@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] Documentation on AppEngine's caching reverse proxy
Given the numerous issues (in the issue tracker, GAE mailing-lists and in speculative blog posts in the wild) surrounding cache headers and the GAE reverse proxy, is there definitive documentation on how it handles headers and best-practice interactions? It is surprising that such an important part of the request-response cycles is rather opaque. saidimu -- 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.
