[google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
Due to the nature of anycasting, it's not something I've been able to experiment with myself. Here's a good post on anycasting: http://blog.rootshell.be/2008/12/23/dnsbe-more-anycasting/ In terms of VPS providers, gandi.net say they've done it before http://wiki.gandi.net/en/hosting/faq-fr-us#i-have-my-own-asn-and-assigned-24-for-anycast-purposes-can-i-use-a-gandi-vps-to-host-my-anycast-service-assuming-that-i-use-other-providers-to-expand-the-geographic-and-network-scope -- 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/-/-QHx9YmB5PYJ. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
This is very good information. Any pointer in utilizing Anycast? Any VPS support it? On Sep 7, 2:53 am, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > I wasn't trying to say 'You can replicate GAE on AWS trivially", GAE is a > massive beast that does one thing in particular that I haven't experimented > with yet: automatically creating and destroying running instances. I was > trying to say you could host your own scaling application on any > infrastructure you like with a little know how. > > You can host in multiple data centers using Anycast addresses, you can > round-robin your load balancers using clusterip or DNS, you can handle load > balancer failures using basic ip failover mechanisms. > > As long as you use some form shared storage backend for session data, such > as memcache, you don't have to worry about sticky sessions on the load > balanacers. > > I have a working prototype on a basic testing network using (nothing amazon > here) > > - nginx as the load balancer and to serve static content > - uwsgi container for the applications > - mysql cluster for redundant data storage > - mysql proxy to load balance across the database servers without any > code modification > - memcached for session storage and output caching > - corosync/pacemaker for ip failover > - rabbitmq/celery for task queueing > > As I say, it's only a working prototype, and in most cases you could host a > smallish application on a smallish vps anywhere. Most VPS providers now > provide fault-tolerance and failover as standard. I'm moving my application > to one such host. > > Using AWS for fault-tolerance, I just read this blog > post:http://blog.rightscale.com/2008/03/26/setting-up-a-fault-tolerant-sit... > > If anyone wants to fund an experiment on setting up an application on AWS > I'd be more than happy to try 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-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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
On 7 September 2011 16:09, Pol wrote: > On Sep 7, 2:53 am, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > > I wasn't trying to say 'You can replicate GAE on AWS trivially", GAE is a > > massive beast that does one thing in particular that I haven't > experimented > > with yet: automatically creating and destroying running instances. I was > > trying to say you could host your own scaling application on any > > infrastructure you like with a little know how. > > Anyone can write a web page, an iPhone app or even drive a car on a > race track with "a little know how". That's doesn't you won't crash at > the first "serious" problem. > > Look, we can debate all day long on the perceived value of GAE is and > what a fair price for the service, but putting this type of service > together does require quite a bit of know how. > > - Pol > > -- > 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. > > Your post indicates you did not read the first sentence of mine. -- Andrew Cassidy BSc (Hons) MBCS http://www.jonisdumb.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.
[google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
On Sep 7, 2:53 am, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > I wasn't trying to say 'You can replicate GAE on AWS trivially", GAE is a > massive beast that does one thing in particular that I haven't experimented > with yet: automatically creating and destroying running instances. I was > trying to say you could host your own scaling application on any > infrastructure you like with a little know how. Anyone can write a web page, an iPhone app or even drive a car on a race track with "a little know how". That's doesn't you won't crash at the first "serious" problem. Look, we can debate all day long on the perceived value of GAE is and what a fair price for the service, but putting this type of service together does require quite a bit of know how. - Pol -- 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
I wasn't trying to say 'You can replicate GAE on AWS trivially", GAE is a massive beast that does one thing in particular that I haven't experimented with yet: automatically creating and destroying running instances. I was trying to say you could host your own scaling application on any infrastructure you like with a little know how. You can host in multiple data centers using Anycast addresses, you can round-robin your load balancers using clusterip or DNS, you can handle load balancer failures using basic ip failover mechanisms. As long as you use some form shared storage backend for session data, such as memcache, you don't have to worry about sticky sessions on the load balanacers. I have a working prototype on a basic testing network using (nothing amazon here) - nginx as the load balancer and to serve static content - uwsgi container for the applications - mysql cluster for redundant data storage - mysql proxy to load balance across the database servers without any code modification - memcached for session storage and output caching - corosync/pacemaker for ip failover - rabbitmq/celery for task queueing As I say, it's only a working prototype, and in most cases you could host a smallish application on a smallish vps anywhere. Most VPS providers now provide fault-tolerance and failover as standard. I'm moving my application to one such host. Using AWS for fault-tolerance, I just read this blog post: http://blog.rightscale.com/2008/03/26/setting-up-a-fault-tolerant-site-using-amazons-availability-zones/ If anyone wants to fund an experiment on setting up an application on AWS I'd be more than happy to try 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/-/YnQr6kcNwVMJ. 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Wilson MacGyver wrote: > > I understand people are upset about GAE pricing, but let's not pretend > this is as easy as > 1: sign up for amazon, 2: setup 3 instances in amazon east, 3: webscale :) Part of the problem is that there is a distinct difference between GAE frontends and GAE backends. GAE frontends may or may not be overpriced - certainly they provide compelling benefits WRT scalability, fault tolerance, access to services, etc. GAE backends, on the other hand, are clearly overpriced. They provide little benefit over a server instance in AWS or rackspacecloud or linode, and they cost 5X as much. The best argument you can make for backends is that they have direct access to the GAE APIs, but you can easily enough proxy those calls from outside. 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.
[google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
On Sep 6, 12:47 am, Wilson MacGyver wrote: > I wouldn't use the word "trivial". tell that to foursquare, quora, etc. > > to setup something that's comparable to GAE, you'd have to setup > instances in both > amazon East and West, handle replication from both sides. have fail over. > > and no, it's not just as easy as adding machines from both east and > west together as a cluster. > amazon charges you network fee for any traffic outside of a single > region. so ie, you pay for > any traffic between your instances in east and west. Plus you have to > deal with latency. I don't what you are saying, app engine doesn't charge this? Please show the document url. AWS will not charge you for reading data in the same region, but app engine will. > > I understand people are upset about GAE pricing, but let's not pretend > this is as easy as > 1: sign up for amazon, 2: setup 3 instances in amazon east, 3: webscale :) Firstly, it is not hard, not harder than learning gae specified things. Secondly, we admit both services have their own advantages. Thirdly, AWS can't do all app engine can do, but app engine can't do all AWS can do. Fourth, we are upset is not for app engien new price is high but for it is TOO high! > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > > I agree that one admin would be enough. I have not used EC2 myself but > > building a load-balancing, fault-tolerant cluster is relatively trivial if > > you've done it before. > > > I've just designed and built a prototype for hosting django using readily > > available free software. > > -- > Omnem crede diem tibi diluxisse supremum. -- 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
On Sep 6, 12:47 am, Wilson MacGyver wrote: > I wouldn't use the word "trivial". tell that to foursquare, quora, etc. > > to setup something that's comparable to GAE, you'd have to setup > instances in both > amazon East and West, handle replication from both sides. have fail over. > > and no, it's not just as easy as adding machines from both east and > west together as a cluster. > amazon charges you network fee for any traffic outside of a single > region. so ie, you pay for > any traffic between your instances in east and west. Plus you have to > deal with latency. I don't what you are saying, app engine doesn't charge this? Please show the document url. AWS will not charge you for reading data in the same region, but app engine will. > > I understand people are upset about GAE pricing, but let's not pretend > this is as easy as > 1: sign up for amazon, 2: setup 3 instances in amazon east, 3: webscale :) Firstly, it is not hard. Secondly, we admit both services have their own advantages. Thirdly, AWS can't do all app engine can do, but app engine can't do all AWS can do. Fourth, we are upset is not for app engien new price is high but for it is TOO high! > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > > I agree that one admin would be enough. I have not used EC2 myself but > > building a load-balancing, fault-tolerant cluster is relatively trivial if > > you've done it before. > > > I've just designed and built a prototype for hosting django using readily > > available free software. > > -- > Omnem crede diem tibi diluxisse supremum. -- 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
I wouldn't use the word "trivial". tell that to foursquare, quora, etc. to setup something that's comparable to GAE, you'd have to setup instances in both amazon East and West, handle replication from both sides. have fail over. and no, it's not just as easy as adding machines from both east and west together as a cluster. amazon charges you network fee for any traffic outside of a single region. so ie, you pay for any traffic between your instances in east and west. Plus you have to deal with latency. I understand people are upset about GAE pricing, but let's not pretend this is as easy as 1: sign up for amazon, 2: setup 3 instances in amazon east, 3: webscale :) On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Andrew Cassidy wrote: > I agree that one admin would be enough. I have not used EC2 myself but > building a load-balancing, fault-tolerant cluster is relatively trivial if > you've done it before. > > I've just designed and built a prototype for hosting django using readily > available free software. > -- Omnem crede diem tibi diluxisse supremum. -- 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
I agree that one admin would be enough. I have not used EC2 myself but building a load-balancing, fault-tolerant cluster is relatively trivial if you've done it before. I've just designed and built a prototype for hosting django using readily available free software. -- 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/-/djowXUyxkrYJ. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
Yes, I need. But this should NOT be reason for why gae computing charge 10 times than competitors. If it should, then the surroundings should not charge any more. On Sep 4, 6:39 am, Francois Masurel wrote: > Hi Tapir, > > If you don't need the surroundings, GAE is probably not be the right > solution for you. > > Francois -- 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
Hi Tapir, If you don't need the surroundings, GAE is probably not be the right solution for you. Francois -- 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/-/qaboLljlenoJ. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
"A GAE instance is much more than a 'slice of cpu and memory' - it has a whole 'platform' surrounding it. " yes, but the surroundings will cost extra money! On Sep 4, 6:14 am, Barry Hunter wrote: > Mainly because GAE is not a 'computing' platform as such. If want raw > computing power then again elsewhere will probably suit you better > (and save some money) > > A GAE instance is much more than a 'slice of cpu and memory' - it has > a whole 'platform' surrounding it. > > Apples != Oranges again. > > Or to put it another way, its like comparing two different cars on > their engine alone. You could get a average car, with a really good > engine (and be happy). Or you could get a more expensive car, with a > OK engine, but with nice suspension, interior and a sound system. > > The two cars are good in different ways - need to look at the whole > car, to decide if does the job for you. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Tapir wrote: > > "Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much > > more ..." > > hi, Anders, > > again, this thread is to compare computing prices, not data storage. > > You will pay extra data storage money when using gae. > > > I just want to get a reason from googlers why gae computing cost 10 > > times than competitors. > > > Anders wrote: > >> Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much more > >> powerful than the GAE datastore when it comes to functionality which would > >> demand a lower price for GAE. On the other hand the GAE datastore is > >> designed for scaling, which may be difficult to achieve using ordinary > >> relational databases like MySQL. I like the GAE datastore because it scales > >> automatically. It's just having to pay for frontend instances I think > >> really > >> sucks. > > > -- > > 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 > > athttp://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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
Mainly because GAE is not a 'computing' platform as such. If want raw computing power then again elsewhere will probably suit you better (and save some money) A GAE instance is much more than a 'slice of cpu and memory' - it has a whole 'platform' surrounding it. Apples != Oranges again. Or to put it another way, its like comparing two different cars on their engine alone. You could get a average car, with a really good engine (and be happy). Or you could get a more expensive car, with a OK engine, but with nice suspension, interior and a sound system. The two cars are good in different ways - need to look at the whole car, to decide if does the job for you. On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Tapir wrote: > "Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much > more ..." > hi, Anders, > again, this thread is to compare computing prices, not data storage. > You will pay extra data storage money when using gae. > > I just want to get a reason from googlers why gae computing cost 10 > times than competitors. > > Anders wrote: >> Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much more >> powerful than the GAE datastore when it comes to functionality which would >> demand a lower price for GAE. On the other hand the GAE datastore is >> designed for scaling, which may be difficult to achieve using ordinary >> relational databases like MySQL. I like the GAE datastore because it scales >> automatically. It's just having to pay for frontend instances I think really >> sucks. > > -- > 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.
[google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
I have started a new thread about a possible reason for the higher prices: http://code.google.com/appengine/forum/?place=topic%2Fgoogle-appengine%2F6WqUi10P8Yo%2Fdiscussion Just a speculation, but you can check it out in case it has some truth to 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/-/4P1QfPDxdBAJ. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
"Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much more ..." hi, Anders, again, this thread is to compare computing prices, not data storage. You will pay extra data storage money when using gae. I just want to get a reason from googlers why gae computing cost 10 times than competitors. Anders wrote: > Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much more > powerful than the GAE datastore when it comes to functionality which would > demand a lower price for GAE. On the other hand the GAE datastore is > designed for scaling, which may be difficult to achieve using ordinary > relational databases like MySQL. I like the GAE datastore because it scales > automatically. It's just having to pay for frontend instances I think really > sucks. -- 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
Ok, sorry about that. But one thing to remember is that SQL is much more powerful than the GAE datastore when it comes to functionality which would demand a lower price for GAE. On the other hand the GAE datastore is designed for scaling, which may be difficult to achieve using ordinary relational databases like MySQL. I like the GAE datastore because it scales automatically. It's just having to pay for frontend instances I think really sucks. -- 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/-/Xlf5Fl4MBTQJ. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
Hi, this thread is just to compare computing prices. GAE storage will cost extra money. On Sep 3, 8:27 am, Anders wrote: > That looks interesting. And no messy instances to have to pay huge amounts > of money for. No Java support though. And I wonder how well their MySQL > solution scales. -- 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
That looks interesting. And no messy instances to have to pay huge amounts of money for. No Java support though. And I wonder how well their MySQL solution scales. -- 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/-/gFhohFfem88J. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
Could you provide more information to show how you save $150/mo? How many pageviews? How much will you cost when you use gea competitor products? On Sep 3, 7:40 am, GR wrote: > haha.. yeah... I'm sure it's not going to scale up to those levels for > sure... but for the small guys who are hosting mildly to moderately popular > websites/services that don't fit within the free package on GAE, this may be > a decent option. > > For my situation, it may work well -- 10 QPS with spikes up to probably 200 > QPS. The app I've got isn't overly huge and won't take long to port -- if > it works, it will save me about $150/mo. In my case it's worth a shot. -- 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
haha.. yeah... I'm sure it's not going to scale up to those levels for sure... but for the small guys who are hosting mildly to moderately popular websites/services that don't fit within the free package on GAE, this may be a decent option. For my situation, it may work well -- 10 QPS with spikes up to probably 200 QPS. The app I've got isn't overly huge and won't take long to port -- if it works, it will save me about $150/mo. In my case it's worth a shot. -- 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/-/_u4xGOVUaRsJ. 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
Oh yes. they are going to let you push 10 Terabits/sec of data for £4.99 a month. Is this mysql database going to scale to 2000QPS? About terabytes of data? ... there are lots of great hosting packages around, ones that will work perfectly well for small or even medium traffic. On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 12:15 AM, GR wrote: > Not sure I feel great about posting this because I haven't tried it > myself, and it seems a bit too good to be true... but have you ever thought > of using the new 4GH service from GoDaddy? It seems as though it's basically > hassle free like GAE -- scaling up as needed. Check out the "Features" and > the "4GH vs. The Rest" tabs for more information. > Again.. not sure if posting this is embarassing or not.. but here's the > link: > http://www.godaddy.com/hosting/web-hosting.aspx?ci=9009 > > -- > 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/-/tsSQeRw1ek4J. > 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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
Not sure I feel great about posting this because I haven't tried it myself, and it seems a bit too good to be true... but have you ever thought of using the new 4GH service from GoDaddy? It seems as though it's basically hassle free like GAE -- scaling up as needed. Check out the "Features" and the "4GH vs. The Rest" tabs for more information. Again.. not sure if posting this is embarassing or not.. but here's the link: http://www.godaddy.com/hosting/web-hosting.aspx?ci=9009 -- 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/-/tsSQeRw1ek4J. 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 app engine new price model is totally wrong
When the development of my website is done, I will move to aws for sure under the new gae price model. I select gae to host my app in development process is for gae provide some free quotas. "They are targeting people who don't have the first clue how to build a distributed system, and those who have built them and know how hard it really is. " If this is right, then I think the market space for gae will be very small, under the new gae price model. On Sep 3, 5:38 am, Joshua Smith wrote: > It's about value. I've done EC2. It's not S3. S3 is easy like GAE. EC2 is > much harder. And the learning curve to construct an EC2-based system that > survives an outage is immense. (Witness Foursquare and Quora which both blew > it.) > > For my enterprise apps, the new GAE pricing is very reasonable. I'm saving > something like $65K/year by not needing a sysadmin to set up and maintain > these systems. The 3-year free ride was great, but I'm getting way more than > a few hundred dollars of value each month. We'll eventually port to HR to > get multi-threads. > > For my free app, it's problematic. For Android game back ends, it's > problematic. For many .com startups, it's problematic (which is not good for > google, because having GAE as a startup incubator was a really good thing). > > But for Enterprise apps, which is what GAE has been longing to get to, the > new pricing really is just fine. > > If you don't think so, then go use EC2. I don't think google is targeting > you if you think you know how to build a distributed system, and you think > you want to. They are targeting people who don't have the first clue how to > build a distributed system, and those who have built them and know how hard > it really is. > > -Joshua > > On Sep 2, 2011, at 5:20 PM, Tapir wrote: > > > > > > > > > For a medium traffic website, I can only the amazon EC2 > > "Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > > bit platform, $0.34 per hour" > > or > > "High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour" > > with self-installed memory cache and without using load balancer at > > all. > > And the storage price is less than half of gae. > > > For the same computing power, I need at least 4 gae backends, which > > will cost more than 4 times money than ec2. > > > On Sep 2, 4:41 pm, Barry Hunter wrote: > >> I know its rather cliché but they really are apples to oranges. > > >> The GAE instance gives you more than a single VPS instance. > > >> Most notably is the Free APIs. In effect you have free access to many > >> things that probably cost you elsewhere. And they dont use the > >> resources of your instance. > >> eg on EC2 you pay extra for a Memcache instance (elasticache). > > >> GAE Instances have in effect a free Elastic Load Balancer (continuing > >> the EC2 comparison) in front of your app. They have Cloudfront bundled > >> in too (the edge-cache). The image manipulation API, is similar to > >> running another gearman instance coordinating dedicated software for > >> resizing iamges (again offloading your instance) > > >> And for the most part you still need a sysadmin to coordinate EC2. > > >> Its the old paas vs iaas argument. > > >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Tapir wrote: > >>> Following I list the prices of main cloud hosting companies. > > >>> Hi, googlers, I just want to ask you a simple question: what is the > >>> reason you think you should charge pretty much with pretty less > >>> resource provided? > > >>> == > > >>> App Engine backend price: > >>> -- > >>> B1 128MB 600MHz $0.08 per hour > >>> B2 256MB 1.2GHz $0.16 per hour > >>> B4 512MB 2.4GHz $0.32 per hour > >>> B8 1024MB 4.8GHz $0.64 per hour > > >>> On-demand Frontend Instances 24 Instance Hours $0.08 / hour > >>> Reserved Frontend Instances $0.05 / hour > > >>> == > > >>> EC2 > >>> > >>> Micro Instance: 613 MB, up to 2 ECUs (for short periodic bursts), > >>> $0.02 per hour > >>> Small Instance: 1.7 GB, 1 ECU, 160 GB of local instance storage, 32- > >>> bit platform, $0.085 per hour > >>> Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > >>> bit platform, $0.34 per hour > >>> Extra Large Instance 15 GB, 8 ECUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, > >>> 64-bit platform, $0.68 per hour > >>> High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > >>> instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour > >>> High-CPU Medium Instance 1.7 GB,, 5 ECUs, 350 GB of local instance > >>> storage, 32-bit platform, $0.17 per hour > > >>> (comment: one ECU provides the equivalent CPU capac
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
But the target projects for app engine are big websites? In fact, if I have a website as you described, I will hire an aws admin and put the website on aws. Yes, one aws admin is enough. Barry Hunter wrote: > Well yes. If your app could live on one EC2 instance, then yes you > will probably save there. > > But if have serious traffic, EC2 is a lot of work. > try juggling say 200 EC2 instances. Webservers, Memcache nodes, > Database nodes, load balancers, dns management, backup nodes, > centralized file storage. Code deployment infestructure. > Monitoring/failver management. It adds up. > Even doing it via rightscale or cloud-formation will take you your > time to micromanage it. > > Multi-datacenter (regions in EC2) failover? - good luck with that. > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Tapir wrote: > > For a medium traffic website, I can only one amazon EC2 instance: > > "Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > > bit platform, $0.34 per hour" > > or > > "High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour" > > with self-installed memory cache and without using load balancer at > > all. > > > > For the same computing power, I need at least 4 gae backends, which > > will cost more than 4 times money than ec2. > > And the storage price is less than half of gae. > > > > On Sep 2, 4:41 pm, Barry Hunter wrote: > > > > On Sep 3, 4:41 am, Barry Hunter wrote: > >> I know its rather cliché but they really are apples to oranges. > >> > >> The GAE instance gives you more than a single VPS instance. > >> > >> Most notably is the Free APIs. In effect you have free access to many > >> things that probably cost you elsewhere. And they dont use the > >> resources of your instance. > >> eg on EC2 you pay extra for a Memcache instance (elasticache). > >> > >> GAE Instances have in effect a free Elastic Load Balancer (continuing > >> the EC2 comparison) in front of your app. They have Cloudfront bundled > >> in too (the edge-cache). The image manipulation API, is similar to > >> running another gearman instance coordinating dedicated software for > >> resizing iamges (again offloading your instance) > >> > >> And for the most part you still need a sysadmin to coordinate EC2. > >> > >> Its the old paas vs iaas argument. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Tapir wrote: > >> > Following I list the prices of main cloud hosting companies. > >> > >> > Hi, googlers, I just want to ask you a simple question: what is the > >> > reason you think you should charge pretty much with pretty less > >> > resource provided? > >> > >> > == > >> > >> > App Engine backend price: > >> > -- > >> > B1 128MB 600MHz $0.08 per hour > >> > B2 256MB 1.2GHz $0.16 per hour > >> > B4 512MB 2.4GHz $0.32 per hour > >> > B8 1024MB 4.8GHz $0.64 per hour > >> > >> > On-demand Frontend Instances 24 Instance Hours $0.08 / hour > >> > Reserved Frontend Instances $0.05 / hour > >> > >> > == > >> > >> > EC2 > >> > > >> > Micro Instance: 613 MB, up to 2 ECUs (for short periodic bursts), > >> > $0.02 per hour > >> > Small Instance: 1.7 GB, 1 ECU, 160 GB of local instance storage, 32- > >> > bit platform, $0.085 per hour > >> > Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > >> > bit platform, $0.34 per hour > >> > Extra Large Instance 15 GB, 8 ECUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, > >> > 64-bit platform, $0.68 per hour > >> > High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > >> > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour > >> > High-CPU Medium Instance 1.7 GB,, 5 ECUs, 350 GB of local instance > >> > storage, 32-bit platform, $0.17 per hour > >> > >> > (comment: one ECU provides the equivalent CPU capacity of a 1.0-1.2 > >> > GHz 2007 Opteron or 2007 Xeon processor.) > >> > >> > == > >> > >> > Azure > >> > > >> > Extra Small 768 MB 1.0 GHz 20 GB Instance Storage $0.05 > >> > Small 1.75 GB 1.6 GHz 225 GB Instance Storage $0.12 > >> > Medium 3.5 GB 2 x 1.6 GHz 490 GB Instance Storage $0.24 > >> > Large 7 GB 4 x 1.6 GHz 1,000 GB Instance Storage High > >> > $0.48 > >> > Extra Large 14 GB 8 x 1.6 GHz 2,040 GB Instance Storage > >> > $0.96 > >> > >> > == > >> > >> > Rackspace > >> > --- > >> > 256MB RAM 10GB Disk $0.015/hr. > >> > 5
Re: [google-appengine] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
Well yes. If your app could live on one EC2 instance, then yes you will probably save there. But if have serious traffic, EC2 is a lot of work. try juggling say 200 EC2 instances. Webservers, Memcache nodes, Database nodes, load balancers, dns management, backup nodes, centralized file storage. Code deployment infestructure. Monitoring/failver management. It adds up. Even doing it via rightscale or cloud-formation will take you your time to micromanage it. Multi-datacenter (regions in EC2) failover? - good luck with that. On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Tapir wrote: > For a medium traffic website, I can only one amazon EC2 instance: > "Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > bit platform, $0.34 per hour" > or > "High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour" > with self-installed memory cache and without using load balancer at > all. > > For the same computing power, I need at least 4 gae backends, which > will cost more than 4 times money than ec2. > And the storage price is less than half of gae. > > On Sep 2, 4:41 pm, Barry Hunter wrote: > > On Sep 3, 4:41 am, Barry Hunter wrote: >> I know its rather cliché but they really are apples to oranges. >> >> The GAE instance gives you more than a single VPS instance. >> >> Most notably is the Free APIs. In effect you have free access to many >> things that probably cost you elsewhere. And they dont use the >> resources of your instance. >> eg on EC2 you pay extra for a Memcache instance (elasticache). >> >> GAE Instances have in effect a free Elastic Load Balancer (continuing >> the EC2 comparison) in front of your app. They have Cloudfront bundled >> in too (the edge-cache). The image manipulation API, is similar to >> running another gearman instance coordinating dedicated software for >> resizing iamges (again offloading your instance) >> >> And for the most part you still need a sysadmin to coordinate EC2. >> >> Its the old paas vs iaas argument. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Tapir wrote: >> > Following I list the prices of main cloud hosting companies. >> >> > Hi, googlers, I just want to ask you a simple question: what is the >> > reason you think you should charge pretty much with pretty less >> > resource provided? >> >> > == >> >> > App Engine backend price: >> > -- >> > B1 128MB 600MHz $0.08 per hour >> > B2 256MB 1.2GHz $0.16 per hour >> > B4 512MB 2.4GHz $0.32 per hour >> > B8 1024MB 4.8GHz $0.64 per hour >> >> > On-demand Frontend Instances 24 Instance Hours $0.08 / hour >> > Reserved Frontend Instances $0.05 / hour >> >> > == >> >> > EC2 >> > >> > Micro Instance: 613 MB, up to 2 ECUs (for short periodic bursts), >> > $0.02 per hour >> > Small Instance: 1.7 GB, 1 ECU, 160 GB of local instance storage, 32- >> > bit platform, $0.085 per hour >> > Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- >> > bit platform, $0.34 per hour >> > Extra Large Instance 15 GB, 8 ECUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, >> > 64-bit platform, $0.68 per hour >> > High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local >> > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour >> > High-CPU Medium Instance 1.7 GB,, 5 ECUs, 350 GB of local instance >> > storage, 32-bit platform, $0.17 per hour >> >> > (comment: one ECU provides the equivalent CPU capacity of a 1.0-1.2 >> > GHz 2007 Opteron or 2007 Xeon processor.) >> >> > == >> >> > Azure >> > >> > Extra Small 768 MB 1.0 GHz 20 GB Instance Storage $0.05 >> > Small 1.75 GB 1.6 GHz 225 GB Instance Storage $0.12 >> > Medium 3.5 GB 2 x 1.6 GHz 490 GB Instance Storage $0.24 >> > Large 7 GB 4 x 1.6 GHz 1,000 GB Instance Storage High >> > $0.48 >> > Extra Large 14 GB 8 x 1.6 GHz 2,040 GB Instance Storage >> > $0.96 >> >> > == >> >> > Rackspace >> > --- >> > 256MB RAM 10GB Disk $0.015/hr. >> > 512MB RAM 20GB Disk $0.03/hr. >> > 1,024MB RAM 40GB Disk $0.06/hr. >> > 2,048MB RAM 80GB Disk $0.12/hr. >> > 4,096MB RAM 160GB Disk $0.24/hr. >> > 8,192MB RAM 320GB Disk $0.48/hr. >> > 15,872MB RAM 620GB Disk $0.96/hr. >> >> > (CPU configures are not unknown) >> >> > -- >> > 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] Re: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
For a medium traffic website, I can only one amazon EC2 instance: "Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- bit platform, $0.34 per hour" or "High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour" with self-installed memory cache and without using load balancer at all. For the same computing power, I need at least 4 gae backends, which will cost more than 4 times money than ec2. And the storage price is less than half of gae. On Sep 2, 4:41 pm, Barry Hunter wrote: On Sep 3, 4:41 am, Barry Hunter wrote: > I know its rather cliché but they really are apples to oranges. > > The GAE instance gives you more than a single VPS instance. > > Most notably is the Free APIs. In effect you have free access to many > things that probably cost you elsewhere. And they dont use the > resources of your instance. > eg on EC2 you pay extra for a Memcache instance (elasticache). > > GAE Instances have in effect a free Elastic Load Balancer (continuing > the EC2 comparison) in front of your app. They have Cloudfront bundled > in too (the edge-cache). The image manipulation API, is similar to > running another gearman instance coordinating dedicated software for > resizing iamges (again offloading your instance) > > And for the most part you still need a sysadmin to coordinate EC2. > > Its the old paas vs iaas argument. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Tapir wrote: > > Following I list the prices of main cloud hosting companies. > > > Hi, googlers, I just want to ask you a simple question: what is the > > reason you think you should charge pretty much with pretty less > > resource provided? > > > == > > > App Engine backend price: > > -- > > B1 128MB 600MHz $0.08 per hour > > B2 256MB 1.2GHz $0.16 per hour > > B4 512MB 2.4GHz $0.32 per hour > > B8 1024MB 4.8GHz $0.64 per hour > > > On-demand Frontend Instances 24 Instance Hours $0.08 / hour > > Reserved Frontend Instances $0.05 / hour > > > == > > > EC2 > > > > Micro Instance: 613 MB, up to 2 ECUs (for short periodic bursts), > > $0.02 per hour > > Small Instance: 1.7 GB, 1 ECU, 160 GB of local instance storage, 32- > > bit platform, $0.085 per hour > > Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > > bit platform, $0.34 per hour > > Extra Large Instance 15 GB, 8 ECUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, > > 64-bit platform, $0.68 per hour > > High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour > > High-CPU Medium Instance 1.7 GB,, 5 ECUs, 350 GB of local instance > > storage, 32-bit platform, $0.17 per hour > > > (comment: one ECU provides the equivalent CPU capacity of a 1.0-1.2 > > GHz 2007 Opteron or 2007 Xeon processor.) > > > == > > > Azure > > > > Extra Small 768 MB 1.0 GHz 20 GB Instance Storage $0.05 > > Small 1.75 GB 1.6 GHz 225 GB Instance Storage $0.12 > > Medium 3.5 GB 2 x 1.6 GHz 490 GB Instance Storage $0.24 > > Large 7 GB 4 x 1.6 GHz 1,000 GB Instance Storage High > > $0.48 > > Extra Large 14 GB 8 x 1.6 GHz 2,040 GB Instance Storage > > $0.96 > > > == > > > Rackspace > > --- > > 256MB RAM 10GB Disk $0.015/hr. > > 512MB RAM 20GB Disk $0.03/hr. > > 1,024MB RAM 40GB Disk $0.06/hr. > > 2,048MB RAM 80GB Disk $0.12/hr. > > 4,096MB RAM 160GB Disk $0.24/hr. > > 8,192MB RAM 320GB Disk $0.48/hr. > > 15,872MB RAM 620GB Disk $0.96/hr. > > > (CPU configures are not unknown) > > > -- > > 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 > > athttp://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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
For a medium traffic website, I can only the amazon EC2 "Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- bit platform, $0.34 per hour" or "High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour" with self-installed memory cache and without using load balancer at all. And the storage price is less than half of gae. For the same computing power, I need at least 4 gae backends, which will cost more than 4 times money than ec2. On Sep 2, 4:41 pm, Barry Hunter wrote: > I know its rather cliché but they really are apples to oranges. > > The GAE instance gives you more than a single VPS instance. > > Most notably is the Free APIs. In effect you have free access to many > things that probably cost you elsewhere. And they dont use the > resources of your instance. > eg on EC2 you pay extra for a Memcache instance (elasticache). > > GAE Instances have in effect a free Elastic Load Balancer (continuing > the EC2 comparison) in front of your app. They have Cloudfront bundled > in too (the edge-cache). The image manipulation API, is similar to > running another gearman instance coordinating dedicated software for > resizing iamges (again offloading your instance) > > And for the most part you still need a sysadmin to coordinate EC2. > > Its the old paas vs iaas argument. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Tapir wrote: > > Following I list the prices of main cloud hosting companies. > > > Hi, googlers, I just want to ask you a simple question: what is the > > reason you think you should charge pretty much with pretty less > > resource provided? > > > == > > > App Engine backend price: > > -- > > B1 128MB 600MHz $0.08 per hour > > B2 256MB 1.2GHz $0.16 per hour > > B4 512MB 2.4GHz $0.32 per hour > > B8 1024MB 4.8GHz $0.64 per hour > > > On-demand Frontend Instances 24 Instance Hours $0.08 / hour > > Reserved Frontend Instances $0.05 / hour > > > == > > > EC2 > > > > Micro Instance: 613 MB, up to 2 ECUs (for short periodic bursts), > > $0.02 per hour > > Small Instance: 1.7 GB, 1 ECU, 160 GB of local instance storage, 32- > > bit platform, $0.085 per hour > > Large Instance 7.5 GB, 4 ECUs, 850 GB of local instance storage, 64- > > bit platform, $0.34 per hour > > Extra Large Instance 15 GB, 8 ECUs, 1690 GB of local instance storage, > > 64-bit platform, $0.68 per hour > > High-Memory Extra Large Instance, 17.1 GB, 6.5 ECUs, 420 GB of local > > instance storage, 64-bit platform, $0.50 per hour > > High-CPU Medium Instance 1.7 GB,, 5 ECUs, 350 GB of local instance > > storage, 32-bit platform, $0.17 per hour > > > (comment: one ECU provides the equivalent CPU capacity of a 1.0-1.2 > > GHz 2007 Opteron or 2007 Xeon processor.) > > > == > > > Azure > > > > Extra Small 768 MB 1.0 GHz 20 GB Instance Storage $0.05 > > Small 1.75 GB 1.6 GHz 225 GB Instance Storage $0.12 > > Medium 3.5 GB 2 x 1.6 GHz 490 GB Instance Storage $0.24 > > Large 7 GB 4 x 1.6 GHz 1,000 GB Instance Storage High > > $0.48 > > Extra Large 14 GB 8 x 1.6 GHz 2,040 GB Instance Storage > > $0.96 > > > == > > > Rackspace > > --- > > 256MB RAM 10GB Disk $0.015/hr. > > 512MB RAM 20GB Disk $0.03/hr. > > 1,024MB RAM 40GB Disk $0.06/hr. > > 2,048MB RAM 80GB Disk $0.12/hr. > > 4,096MB RAM 160GB Disk $0.24/hr. > > 8,192MB RAM 320GB Disk $0.48/hr. > > 15,872MB RAM 620GB Disk $0.96/hr. > > > (CPU configures are not unknown) > > > -- > > 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 > > athttp://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: Why app engine new price model is totally wrong
IMHO, the current price model means it is over for app engine. -- 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.