Re: [appengine-java] Re: Version not ready error (but it's ready)
Thank you very much, after upgrading to 1.3.4 it works :) On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 18:13, Don Schwarz schwa...@google.com wrote: What version of the SDK are you using? I believe that this deadline was increased significantly in 1.3.4. On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.comwrote: Well??? This problem happens EVERY time I deploy these days. As a result Google App Engine has become USELESS as a hosting solution. Any plans to fix this? Anything I can do on my side so that my uploads work? On Jun 7, 4:59 pm, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: I keep on getting this during deployment: Deploying newversion. Will check again in 1 seconds Will check again in 2 seconds Will check again in 4 seconds Will check again in 8 seconds Will check again in 16 seconds Will check again in 32 seconds Will check again in 64 seconds Will check again in 128 seconds Rolling back the update. java.lang.RuntimeException:Versionnot ready. This happens almost every time I deploy. The thing is, the application code deploys just fine, but this error prevents any updates to indexes or queues. In summary, the newversiongets deployed to the app engine just fine. I can set it as defaultversionand it works. What breaks is that any queues or indexes are not updated because they never get uploaded due to the above error. Please help. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: AppEngine gets very slow when not used for some time
This sounds a lot like the sharded counter scenario. I think they came up with a committing to datastore strategy that worked well. On another hand, you can always queue a task and let the task queue persist the preferences when it gets around to it. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:16, Rahul rahul.jun...@gmail.com wrote: Ok. Let me explain the complete scenario. Suppose I have lot of preference on my page which are stored in the database. Now i have multiple options, 1. Load all the preference in Hashmap in a servlet and mark that servlet as Load-on-startup to 0 and then use the hashmap cache when a new user visits the page. User can also change the values of preference and yes if one use change the preference it will be globally changed for all the new users coming to that page. 2. Create a memcache and load the cache in a servlet with load-on- startup as 0. When any new user comes read the memcache and if the value is present use that else go to the database (which will almost never happen as i will update the memcache when some user change the preferences). I also have a requirement if ever a user changes the preferences i need to store the new preference in the database so where should we persist this, I mean on some specific time or when the user changes immediately. Any pointer. Thanks, Rahul On May 24, 9:47 am, Rahul rahul.jun...@gmail.com wrote: Chau, I have already tried various solutions out of those mentioned above, including b) request Google to load your app before start dispatch request to that instance but it is still slow, My exact question is when to put the data in cache. Thanks, Rahul On May 24, 4:49 am, Chau Huynh cmhu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Rahul, About loading request/performance, there're lots of discussions that you can find in the groups, please just try google it. Here are some notes based on reading those. Latency causes by 1- time to start new JVM 2- time to load your application To reduce load time by 1) others star request to a) pay to reserve JVM b) request Google to load your app before start dispatch request to that instance c) accept the situation For 2) we try to a- try to use/replace frameworks with light-weight ones: datastore access framework, MVC framework,... b- try to limit calculation in your index page to alleviate the impact of loading request c- design your object model based on your need, so that you do calculation at insert time, not at query time. For example, in my app, if I want to report on year and quarter, then I have 5 summary record for those, instead of querying and computing those d- caching result. For example, If I know 1 one 5 piece of data above would be read frequently, then I will read those 5 all, and put into memcache for later use ... So it's application-specific, I don't know if each of above can help you. But only you who can know if which one of your code can be cached and how... HTH On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Rahul rahul.jun...@gmail.com wrote: Chau, Thanks for pointing to the link. I did go through the link and i think, what i thought was right. Also i was going through the following point in the section you provided : How can I speed up loading requests? and the second point mentioned is Share expensive initialization between JVMs. For example, put data which is expensive to read or compute into memcache, where it can be quickly read by other JVMs during startup. so in this scenario where do you load this memcache so that it can be shared between the jvm instances. Any pointers or clues highly appreciated. Thanks, Rahul On May 22, 10:51 pm, Chau Huynh cmhu...@gmail.com wrote: It seems like loading request... http://code.google.com/appengine/kb/java.html#What_Is_A_Loading_Request On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 4:55 AM, Rahul rahul.jun...@gmail.com wrote: I have an application running on appengine and no doubt it works great. but when the application is not used for some time. it goes very slow. Suppose i don;t use the application for around 5 hours or so, then next time when i try to use it, the response is very slow. Is there any thing specific which i am missing in adding application to appengine. Any clues are pointers are highly appreciated. Thanks, Rahul -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2B unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
Re: [appengine-java] Re: indexes
Ah, I understand. Yeah, they don't show you the automatic ones. On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 03:16, Philip Tucker ptuc...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. By table I mean annotated Java class. One reason I was confused about the indexes is I don't see many of the ones I would expect when I navigate to https://appengine.google.com/datastore/indexes, but I guess they must exist or my queries would be failing. On Apr 30, 2:16 pm, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: uhm... read the next section? http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/datastore/queriesandindexe... as far as indexes getting applied to existing tables... (not sure by what you mean by table), but yes, that's why when you upload new index it is building, it's being applied to existing stuff. On Apr 30, 12:54 am, Philip Tucker ptuc...@gmail.com wrote: According to this, The App Engine datastore maintains an index for every query an application intends to make. http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/datastore/queriesandindexe. .. Does GAE just scan the app Java code for Query.setFilter, or do we need to do annotate queries for these indexes to be generated. Also, it appears new indexes do not get applied to existing tables when we deploy application code with new queries or @INDEX annotations - is this correct? Is there a way to do that, or are we required to create a new table and copy the data over? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp:// groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp:// groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: Inequality Filters Are Allowed On One Property Only
Yes, but then you just do a test on the entity you got from the query (one test on one entity, fast) so add a last step.. using previous logic you end up with x2=71 y2=75 final step will beis (z of 76) (y2 of 75) if no... no results.. if yes... have 1 result that should solve that part On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 02:04, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tristan, Really appreciate the logic you suggested. But consider this case: There are only two intervals in db: x1 = 4 y1 = 70 and x2 = 71 y2 = 75. I want to search by 76. The 76 doesn't fall in any category but still the query will return the second interval, which is not correct. Instead the query should say that there is no matching interval. Am I correct? Regards Romesh On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Tristan Slominski tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: in that case the solution to your dilemma is as follows query.addFilter(x, FilterOptions.LESS_THAN, z); query.addSort(x, SortOrder.DESC); then execute the query with a limit of 1 that is the answer you seek in other words... assume you have two intervalsx1 = 4 y1 = 70 and x2 = 71 y2 = 75. you want to find interval that matches your condition ofx 74 y add filter for x less than 74 will give you two results where x1=4 in first result and x2=71 in second result now sort these results descending so that x2 is the first result x2=71 x1=4 set limit of 1 gives your query a result of x2 you don't need property y does that work for you? On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 22:45, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tristan, You got a good catch. But the code which populates the data will never let this happen. If there is a pair x = 4 and y = 10, then there will be no such other pair which consist values between 4 and 10. there will be one and only one set for values 4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and that will be (4,10). I hope my explanation is helpful. So it is guaranteed of having one solution per query. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Tristan Slominski tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, so I've been thinking about the problem description... you mentioned that there will ever only be one solution for the query, but that doesn't seem like a valid constraint. For example, let x = 4 and y = 10, let x2 = 5 and y2 = 11. The value of z = 6 will result in two solutions. The reason I am asking, is that the contraint of only one solution existing suggest a different mapping of solutions than the one you suggested (not sure what that different approach would be yet, but it could be something along the lines of enumerating the intervals). Can you guarantee the constraint of only one solution per query? On May 3, 2010 3:01 AM, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the possible value of x and y can be 2020 and 203204206207. do you see that it is possible to make such thing in 5000 element limitation. Are you talking of ArrayList? Your solution is good for small list, but I am afraid that it will not suit my requirement.. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Thomas mylee...@gmail.com wrote: Hi romesh: Datastor... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en
Re: [appengine-java] Re: Inequality Filters Are Allowed On One Property Only
Sure, good luck. On May 4, 2010 9:03 AM, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Tristan, Seems you have got it solved. Thanks. I think it should work for me without any issues. I will let you know once I implement it. You have a good logic man. Can I add you on Gmail? Thanks and Regards Romesh On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Tristan Slominski tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, bu... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: Inequality Filters Are Allowed On One Property Only
Hey, so I've been thinking about the problem description... you mentioned that there will ever only be one solution for the query, but that doesn't seem like a valid constraint. For example, let x = 4 and y = 10, let x2 = 5 and y2 = 11. The value of z = 6 will result in two solutions. The reason I am asking, is that the contraint of only one solution existing suggest a different mapping of solutions than the one you suggested (not sure what that different approach would be yet, but it could be something along the lines of enumerating the intervals). Can you guarantee the constraint of only one solution per query? On May 3, 2010 3:01 AM, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the possible value of x and y can be 2020 and 203204206207. do you see that it is possible to make such thing in 5000 element limitation. Are you talking of ArrayList? Your solution is good for small list, but I am afraid that it will not suit my requirement.. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Thomas mylee...@gmail.com wrote: Hi romesh: Datastor... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: Inequality Filters Are Allowed On One Property Only
in that case the solution to your dilemma is as follows query.addFilter(x, FilterOptions.LESS_THAN, z); query.addSort(x, SortOrder.DESC); then execute the query with a limit of 1 that is the answer you seek in other words... assume you have two intervalsx1 = 4 y1 = 70 and x2 = 71 y2 = 75. you want to find interval that matches your condition ofx 74 y add filter for x less than 74 will give you two results where x1=4 in first result and x2=71 in second result now sort these results descending so that x2 is the first result x2=71 x1=4 set limit of 1 gives your query a result of x2 you don't need property y does that work for you? On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 22:45, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Tristan, You got a good catch. But the code which populates the data will never let this happen. If there is a pair x = 4 and y = 10, then there will be no such other pair which consist values between 4 and 10. there will be one and only one set for values 4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and that will be (4,10). I hope my explanation is helpful. So it is guaranteed of having one solution per query. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Tristan Slominski tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, so I've been thinking about the problem description... you mentioned that there will ever only be one solution for the query, but that doesn't seem like a valid constraint. For example, let x = 4 and y = 10, let x2 = 5 and y2 = 11. The value of z = 6 will result in two solutions. The reason I am asking, is that the contraint of only one solution existing suggest a different mapping of solutions than the one you suggested (not sure what that different approach would be yet, but it could be something along the lines of enumerating the intervals). Can you guarantee the constraint of only one solution per query? On May 3, 2010 3:01 AM, romesh soni soni.rom...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Thomas, the possible value of x and y can be 2020 and 203204206207. do you see that it is possible to make such thing in 5000 element limitation. Are you talking of ArrayList? Your solution is good for small list, but I am afraid that it will not suit my requirement.. On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Thomas mylee...@gmail.com wrote: Hi romesh: Datastor... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: WARNING: This request caused a new process to be started for your application, and thus caused your application code to be loaded for the first time. This request may thus t
Don't worry about it, it really should be INFO. Its telling you that another jvm started to serve the requests. Its a warning because the assumption is that it is taking you too long to bservice requests and if the trend continues you'l keep starting new jvms eating up your quota. If you think you're ok and can't compute a response any faster then there's nothing that needs to be done. Hence it should be INFO On Apr 22, 2010 10:09 AM, Abhimanyu Saxena abhimanyusax...@gmail.com wrote: so what does it mean? I am repeatedly getting this warning with my app... is there anything that I can do for it ? On Apr 22, 7:24 am, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to make it an INFO and not a WARNING? Should I start an issue? As a programmer, I really don't have any direct control over this. All the WARNINGS are just masking other important issues that should be warnings. On Apr 21, 1:33 pm, Ikai L (Google) ika...@google.com wrote: Yep, we're rolling this out slowly with the 1.3.3 release to let developers know that some requests are slow because they are startup requests. On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 6:09 AM, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, I started seeing when a task queue starts now: WARNING: 200 OK This request caused a new process to be started for your application, and thus caused your application code to be loaded for the first time. This request may thus take longer and use more CPU than a typical request for your application. instead of this WARNING: 500 Request was aborted after waiting too long to attempt to service your request. Most likely, this indicates that you have reached your simultaneous dynamic request limit. This is almost always due to excessively high latency in your app. Please see http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/quotas.htmlformore details. I like it. Is this the expected behavior from now on? Tristan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2B unsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- Ikai Lan Developer Relations, Google App Engine Twitter:http://twitter.com/ikai Delicious:http://delicious.com/ikailan Google App Engine links: Blog:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp:// groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp:// groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
Re: [appengine-java] Re: Why do custom indexes require single-property indexes?
Thanks :) On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.orgwrote: Here's a link: http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine/browse_thread/thread/2f6aa695a80fd5de Jeff On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Jeff, Sounds to me like you're correct in the not only don't set single- property indexes, but also don't include the property in any custom indexes interpretation of setUnindexedProperty. Can you post the link to the continuation post? I'm curious what Googlers have to say about it. Tristan On Mar 18, 11:13 am, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: This doesn't make sense to me. Every scrap of documentation I've found says that GAE queries only follow a single index (the one exception being zigzag merges, which don't apply here). This means that to answer my query.filter(foo, fooValue1).sort(-bar), there must be an index that contains the foo and bar data sorted appropriately, no? Ie: /Thing/foo:fooValue1/bar:bar9/[thekeyvalue] /Thing/foo:fooValue1/bar:bar8/[thekeyvalue] /Thing/foo:fooValue1/bar:bar7/[thekeyvalue] /Thing/foo:fooValue2/bar:bar8/[thekeyvalue] /Thing/foo:fooValue2/bar:bar7/[thekeyvalue] To satisfy this query, GAE should start following this custom index and that's pretty much it. There's no reason for it to touch the single-property indexes (foo ASC, foo DESC, bar ASC, and bar DESC). ...and in my test, if I remove the custom index from datastore-indexes.xml, it doesn't work. But also if I use setUnindexedProperty, it doesn't work. It's like setUnindexedProperty is being interpreted as not only don't set single-property indexes, but also don't include the property in any custom indexes. This is counterintuitive - if I wanted the index not to be built, I can just remove the index. I realize now that perhaps I posted this to the wrong mailing list. The guys who created the I/O videos about the datastore seem to be python fans, so I'll retry my original post on the google-appengine list. Jeff On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Tristan tristan.slomin...@gmail.com wrote: Not official but been doing this for a while. Your custom index is most likely build from the query. So, when you do Query query = new Query(Thing); query.addFilter(foo, FilterOperator.EQUAL, fooValue); query.addSort(bar, SortDirection.DESCENDING); That is what builds your custom index. However, when you setUnindexedProperty here Entity ent = new Entity(Thing); ent.setUnindexedProperty(foo, fooValue); ent.setUnindexedProperty(bar, 123L); You are not generating any index entries. So the issue isn't that adding custom indexes after-the-fact [is] really, really painful but that you are not generating any indexes for the datastore to run the queries against when you use setUnindexedProperty(). In other words, when you execute a query, it checks the index to give you results. But you marked your data as don't index me, so there is nothing for query to work with, as far as it is concerned, there's nothing in the datastore. Cheers! On Mar 16, 4:07 pm, Jeff Schnitzer j...@infohazard.org wrote: On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:04 PM, John Patterson jdpatter...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 Mar 2010, at 12:25, Jeff Schnitzer wrote: I'm puzzled by the behavior of custom indexes. I have a simple test case below, a simple equality filter on one property combined with a descending sort on another property. If I set the properties with setUnindexedProperty(), the query fails to find the result. If I set the properties with setProperty(), it does. I also wondered why - I assume that the custom index build reads the single property indexes directly which must be more efficient than reading the Entities table. I guess that is possible, but seems like a poor design decision. It makes adding custom indexes after-the-fact really, really painful. Can someone official chime in on this? Is it intended behavior, or should we file an issue against it? The documentation doesn't say much on the subject, and all the conceptual explanation of queries suggests that these extra single-property indexes will be unused. Jeff -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine-j...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine-java+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-appengine-java%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group athttp:// groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google App Engine for Java group. To
