The logic is something like this.
int retry = 3;
while( retry = 0 )
{
Transaction txn = datastoreService.beginTransaction();
try
{
// persistence code here
}
catch (EntityNotFoundException e)
{
Anything on this? I'm sorta stuck :(
On 2 September 2011 00:32, Nischal nischalshett...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the code :
URLFetchService fetchService = URLFetchServiceFactory.getURLFetchService();
URL posturl = new URL(http://www.example.com/comment?token=xxx;);
HTTPResponse response =
I was using appengine python appcfg.py to do a bulk download/upload of data
from my datastore. Works great. I had all my data in csv file when I did a
download_data. My entities have hashmap properties (serialized data on
datastore) which are saved in a base64 encoding in the csvfile.
Hello All,
I know there has been a lot of speculation that new billing will be taking
affect in 2 weeks. In our notice we said that we'd be leaving preview
(which is when new pricing will go into effect) in the second half of
September. I wanted to be a bit more specific and let you all know
It would be really great if appstats could include billing details. This way
a developer
would know exact billing amount, in development server environment.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Francois Masurel f.masu...@gmail.comwrote:
How does all this relate to this issue ?
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=5414
I guess I'm a bit lost in fact.
On my rather low-traffic java app I need to have one Always on instance
to
Hey Casey,
One other thought, you could run over the data bundling and dumping it to
the blobstore. Then pull the blobs to amazon. That might let you get a
little more efficiency in the transfer. I've done it going in, should work
just as well going out.
Aldo note that auto generated keys
Hi Daniel,
I strongly suspect you're going to need a different solution to transfer
that much data out in a timely manner. The best solution depends on your
write rates and update patterns
Robert
On Sep 1, 2011 1:15 PM, Daniel danielshaneup...@gmail.com wrote:
We will be facing the same
Maybe I misunderstood the question, but I'm not sure how instance settings
for versions impacts this. Are you currently running both an app for paid
users and an app for unpaid users from the same App? Is there a reason you
can't run it as 2 Apps? While Versions can serve live traffic they were
If your remove and re-add a single property index, you'll have to iterate
over all your entities reputting them. Single property indexes won't be
auto-rebuilt based on your model defs.
Robert
On Sep 1, 2011 1:59 PM, Vivek Puri v...@vivekpuri.com wrote:
@Jason, you have to very careful about
Here is one use case for per version settings: I always want my user
requests served very fast, so I want ow latency / willingness to spin up
instances for the default version. However, I also do a lot of processing
in tasks, but it does not need to spin up instances aggressively. Too bad I
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Gregory D'alesandre gr...@google.com wrote:
Are you currently running both an app for paid users and an app for unpaid
users from the same App?
Yes.
Is there a reason you can't run it as 2 Apps?
Yes. Because the billing was used to be so cheap that I was
Hey Robert, I'm certain you already considered this but would it be possible
to use backends for the processing tasks? This sort of situation is why we
are looking into putting settings on Versions but it hasn't come up that
often which is why it isn't a higher priority. I can't find an external
Since I am also a Azure user I just got an email with the shocking
news: Azure will reduce prices for their smallest instance by 20%
starting on the 1st of October. ($0.04/hour for 1GHz 768MB Memory)
Must be a bad position for MSFT. No vendor lock in and strong
competition.
--
You received
Hey Greg,
There are a number of reasons I won't use back ends for this. I thought
I'd submitted an issue for this months ago, but maybe I just talked with you
guys about it. I'll try to double check and submit one if needed tomorrow.
Robert
On Sep 2, 2011 2:38 AM, Gregory Dapos;alesandre
Thanks Robert, as I said, this is in progress so you don't *need* to submit
an issue, but if lots of people need this, we could try to raise the
priority.
Greg
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Robert Kluin robert.kl...@gmail.comwrote:
Hey Greg,
There are a number of reasons I won't use back
So you're saying stay on MS since it will become super stable when everyone
has migrated to HR? :-)
Look at Aug 29,
http://code.google.com/status/appengine/detail/hr-datastore/2011/08/29#ae-trust-detail-hr-datastore-query-latency
Bringing this back to billing, there's no sla on the datastore,
Hi all,
I've used Google App Engine for more than 2.5 years. I suffered a hard time
to read the English documents, articles and the SDK source code. I thought I
knew it very well, but now I find I was wrong.
It was a great platform to build either small or big web services, but I
believe it won't
Azure looks pretty cool. But isn't .NET like a monopoly? I would like an
open source cloud platform. That would really make the prices go down.
Because new cloud providers would basically mostly have to provide the
hardware infrastructure since the software for the cloud services would be
open
Thanks for the suggestions Robert.
Is there documentation on using the remote API anywhere? A wrapper lib
would be even better...
Thanks,
-Casey
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Robert Kluin robert.kl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Casey,
One other thought, you could run over the data bundling
This is a price increase, the second page you reference was incorrect and
has been updated.
Greg
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Stephen sdeasey+gro...@gmail.com wrote:
The old price for outgoing bandwidth is $0.12/GB:
Here is a usecase that may support M/S over HRD.
I have a form where we capture appointment information such as date, time
and some other details. Upon a successful save the resulting page is a
calendar view that needs to read all appointments including this newly
created appointment.
Given
Hi Google Folks,
For all these years, you had a Why App
Enginehttp://code.google.com/appengine/whyappengine.html page
which lists the 2nd point as..
*Free and Risk-free Development*
Not only is creating an App Engine application easy, it's free! You can
create an account and publish an
While you are working please fix the scheduler.
It needs to be possible for us to force as little as 1 instance at any given
time - knowning that the scheduler obviously does not work.
Even with a setting allowing up to 15s in latency before a new instance is
spun up, new instances are being
Sad to hear this Keakon.
I too had to pick up Python for GAE, over 3 years ago and now just love
working on Python and GAE. The current pricing changes to take effect
without multi-threading support for Python, screws those early adopters
too.
May be we should meet at the *App-Engine-olics
MSFT has an interesting approach that is IMHO an opposite to
exploiting their market power. They deliver their technology to
partners like eBay, Dell and HP so they can offer the same cloud
service (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/appliance/) in theory
you could easily switch from one to
Did some more analyzing this morning after changing the settings last night
to:
*Max Idle Instances: ( 1 )
Min Pending Latency: ( 15.0s )*
After 1 hours and too many coffee cups, I got the following results.
the main problem is .NET, isn't it? :D
I can't consider a proprietary dev platform to be the right solution even if
I know it's good on many aspects and brought many interesting ideas!
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Philip philip.mates...@driggle.com wrote:
MSFT has an interesting approach
Azure isn't .Net only. I run Java on it.
From: google-appengine@googlegroups.com
[mailto:google-appengine@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pascal Voitot Dev
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 12:44 AM
To: google-appengine@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [google-appengine] Re: Azure is changing its
File a ticket. I think this should be part of Google Take Out
http://www.dataliberation.org/takeout-products
From: google-appengine@googlegroups.com
[mailto:google-appengine@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Casey Haakenson
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 12:13 AM
To:
You can also use PHP on it.
Another big plus is that you don't sign a contract with an US company
if you live in Europe. I signed a contract with the local Microsoft
office and as a result I don't have to pay any tax for using Azure.
For GAE I've to pay tax to the US government.
On Sep 2, 9:48
Hello Wesley,
d. most importantly, these changes were announced publicly during the second
week of May during Google I/O --
seehttp://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/05/year-ahead-for-google-app..
slightly more than a few weeks notice.
well, the changes were maybe announced back
No, actually I migrated to HR earlier (was an awful experience with 30+hrs
downtime. trial run took 8hrs only with the same data).
I am just trying to give an signal to everyone before something bad could
hit us again. Maybe GAE team could do sth before it happen.
--
You received this
Yes thats a really strong point that you SHOULD NOT over-doing
indexed=False. You will regret one day you found that you dont even have
a way to query sth extremely simple, like for debugging.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine
I completely agree with the above and am experiencing exactly the same issue
with the scheduler spawning new instances that do nothing instead of letting
the first instance deal with the requests - which is visible in the logs and
code that it easily could do.
--
You received this message
So I would translate it to new pricing will be effective starting 27th
Sept.
Sorry I am not trying to be ridiculous, but thats what you did for
announcing price change back at May with so many unknown and now announcing
it effective within one month, while most of the issues are still not yet
really java? I thought it was just .net/php
interesting to know!
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
Azure isn’t .Net only. I run Java on it.
** **
*From:* google-appengine@googlegroups.com [mailto:
google-appengine@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of
I think you can make use of all the resources you are paying for is already
a big big BIG plus over GAE.
Who care much about the language? Many of us started using Python after
choosing GAE. And they are now even asking us to learn GO.
--
You received this message because you are
I may have to check if I'm in a beta/non-public thing. I enjoy some
special privileges and may have something others don't.
From: google-appengine@googlegroups.com
[mailto:google-appengine@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Pascal Voitot Dev
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 1:10 AM
To:
I've 2 apps that have a big increase, so one will be shutdown and for the
other I will try to optimize it more.
But now, I've stopped all my current projects.
With this new pricing, developments will be driven by the costs.
I like to optimize my apps to make them better or faster but optimize
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-cnnJWBgZNl8/TmCYTtq9XKI/ACg/aoGn0qR58dU/scheduler2.png
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
@de Witte
Do you know there will be also a tighter memory limit you most likely
exceed?
On Sep 2, 10:48 am, de Witte jcreator.xi...@gmail.com wrote:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-cnnJWBgZNl8/TmCYTtq9XKI/AC...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
The testing for this feature will likely go on until it is included in
an upcoming SDK release.
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Joshua Smith joshuaesm...@charter.net wrote:
How much time do I have? Because I think I, like everyone else, will be
spending the next two weeks dealing with the
The app itself doesn't need much memory. The memory footprint is high
because of the many active threads to handle the requests.
Less memory means lesser threads means lesser requests to be handled
asynchronously by a single instance.
So hopefully they won't reduce it, where did you read
To be fair to the App Engine team: I tried concurrency again and the issue
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=4834 seems fixed
to me. I was able to reduce my instances from 8 to 1 (sometimes 2) which
will certainly reduce my bill *a lot*. I can live with the price of one
By having a guarantee of only 1 instance (or any specified max number of
instances) we as customers can ensure that our budget isn't suddenly eaten
away by spikes of lots of instances being spawned. One potential problem is
of course that the application can become extremely slow resulting in a
Are you using JDO by any chance de Witte?
There is a bad connection leak in DataNucleus (OMFContext) that
results in major leaked memory. If you have non-transactional reads
enabled in jdoconfig.xml (the default)
you have this leak.
Event when the request limit was only 15000, my instances grew
This has nothing to do with memory leaks. As I told before I experience the
exact same problem and
1) the new limits are not in force yet
2) there are no mentions in the log that a soft memory limit has been
reached (which there are, if you have a leak and it closes down instances as
a
I'm sorry I don't find the original source anymore (it was somewhere
in the BIG faq thread) but I've asked for confirmation in the IRC
channel. With the new pricing there will be a 128mb memory limit for
frontend instances.
On Sep 2, 11:16 am, de Witte jcreator.xi...@gmail.com wrote:
The app
The memory issue is indeed tangental to the scheduler issues. A few of
us just happened to notice it from de Witte's instance snapshot and
figured we'd point it out as a separate issue and potential problem
for him once the 128MB limit is enforced.
I believe that that instance would already be
As I wrote in another thread, I think Google should offer free and unlimited
instances. Google will still make a lot of money on the quotas. And the
complex and messy configuration of instances and the scheduler would be
something Google could work on under the hood so to speak. A cloud service
Thanks for the references!
I read about PayPalX and Google check out... for example,
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6092626/how-to-integrate-payment-processing-with-gwt-gae-based-app
Question:
1. PayPalX is a community project. Is it a good option to depend on
it?
2. There are some complaints
After seeing all the uproar regarding the new pricing model, I'm wondering
how it will affect small applications.
I currently have a few small applications with billing enabled. I had to
enable billing so that i could use one of the API's (Cant remember which)
My apps are so small, that
+1 exact my questionfor blobstore api you need biliing
I have set max instance to 1 and latency to 15s. thats *almost* ensure free
quota.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Joe joebou...@gmail.com wrote:
After seeing all the uproar regarding the new pricing model, I'm wondering
how it
I got the $50 to take by adding $0.01 to my budget. Simply reallocating within
the budget didn't give me the credit.
-Joshua
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To post to this group, send email to
It seems to be that maybe it would be better/easier to just have
instance settings for tasks/cron vs user-facing instances. I
believe most people want user-facing to run fast and don't mind if
tasks/cron run slower and save them some $$$. I'd also personally
like instance settings by a time/date
With Billing Enabled to make use of the blobstore, if we fail to disable
billing, i presume the $9 monthly fee will kick in?
So we need to time the disabling of billing very carefully so as to keep the
Blobstore API working, but not incur a $9 fee for the first month.
Does google have a plan
:-)
On Thursday, September 1, 2011 5:53:56 PM UTC-5, Wesley C (Google) wrote:
hi gary,
glad to see that you're an App Inventor user! yes, Google has shut down
Labs of which App Inventor was part of, however it has since found a new
home at MIT:
I have set max instance to 1 and latency to 15s. thats *almost* ensure free
quota
-- it does not. Wait and see. The scheduler ignores the latter setting and
spawns new instances (that you will have to pay for) anyway.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Hi Greg
You didn't really read my post. I explicitly said the graph of instances
doesn't really help.
How do you guage you instance hours accumulated for the hour from the
instances graph that is currently there.
Maybe a graph isn't the right tool, Can you tell me how many instance hours
and
This is a nice restatement of the exact same questions I asked in my snarky
Really Terribly Designed Pricing Page thread.
I hope our google overlords will answer your nice questions, since they seem to
be completely ignoring my nasty ones. :)
PLEASE: Nobody derail this thread with the that FAQ
It would be great if all the different resources that we'll have to pay for
would be included into the request logs (different datastore operations
etc.).
This would greatly help us to tweak the apps before the new pricing takes
effect.
Thanks a lot.
Daniel
--
You received this message
In case anyone here didn't catch the bold type in google's announcement, I
strongly recommend you do this:
For each App you have:
Billing Settings:
If not enabled:
enable at the minimum $2
else:
increase your budget by $0.01
That gives you a $50 credit. When they turn on
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Tim Hoffman zutes...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Greg
You didn't really read my post. I explicitly said the graph of instances
doesn't really help.
How do you guage you instance hours accumulated for the hour from the
instances graph that is currently there.
Maybe
Just look at the stack in that example you posted. It is a non trivial
excercise and this guys has gone in deep.
How many people are willing too or can..
And it doesn't talk about how robust it is. Its not a lot of fun performing
rolling upgrades of cluster of
rdbms backends whilst keeping
I guess it's answered there :
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/o-kq2OQXIKA/07VCVcpsY48J
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
I would be interested in what the gae team has to say about this. It
seems exactly the same as the evolution of the master slave data
store. Its latency creeped up over the first few years and became
pretty unstable. Definitely concerning.
Mike
On Sep 1, 9:30 pm, Raymond C. windz...@gmail.com
Only partly (since he mentions blobstore, but not email, etc.).
Here's are some simple yes/no questions:
- Will free apps and $9/mo apps have access to all the same APIs?
- Do free apps and $9/mo apps have the same free quotas?
The quotas on this page
Guys ,
So i've been playing with Canvas and images and noticed that images from the
high-performance can't be manipulated with canvas(Security Exception).
So i've solved this by getting my images directly from my blobstore, but now
i've read about CORS at:
Hi
Actually I would disagree on the M/S front, all of my apps are on M/S and
even despite the recent issues
M/S is way more stable than it was in 2008 and 2009, I mean WAY MORE STABLE
;-)
Thats not to say more growing pains won't be felt. My guess is with a
supposed imminent exodus of apps,
Or perhaps this is more a GWT question because it already seems to be
enabled server-side, in that case i'm sorry for posting on the wrong forum.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Yes, I agree that it won't (can't) get as bad as m/s did get because
HRD is awesome. My concern is mostly over how they provision and that
the latency is that much higher than it was. Why does the load have
such a big impact on latency of datastore query?
We keep very detailed statistics about
HI Barry
I realize they area under the graph is number of instances, however in my
case there is in fact a lot of instance churn (especially when I drop off
always on)
Like I said later maybe graphs aren't the best way to provide this
information.
I do want to see the rate of instance
I was just thinking about this the other day, and am also interested on how
the transitionwill affect the Blobstore API availability.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Maybe I should explain...the details don't matter, the key point here is
that the design in the GoogleIO talk involves a separate entity for each
post. Google charges a buck per 10K ops, so if each post returned is an op,
then a hundred pageviews showing a hundred posts each is a buck.
That seems
don't be evil...oh sorry that was for microsoft.
larger question is: will such 'startegy' decision be on all Google products
- gmail, gdocs?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
I am guessing Brett doesn't have to foot the bill for this. Uncle
Google picks up the tab since he works for them.
On Sep 2, 8:31 am, Dennis Peterson dennisbpeter...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe I should explain...the details don't matter, the key point here is
that the design in the GoogleIO talk
Yes, I seem to have the same issue. The scheduler basically keeps an idle
instance around all the time even though latency on the first instance is
1.8ms and it is not necessary.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this
Here's my situation:
- I'm running an app as a public service, and I'd rather not have to charge
for it. Our google overlords have not given me any way to duck the new pricing
for my do-gooder app, so I'm looking to game the system if I can. :)
- My app is used infrequently by humans, in
If an instance is available almost the instant you need one, how is it fair
that you charge for a 15 minute startup time?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Dont you get one instance (well two until multi-threading) free? - so
you can have a dynamic instance always loaded. (ie you get 24 instance
hours free a day)
So providing what you want can be served by this instance, you dont
have any (instance) changes.
As for saving the file, you could put it
What I think could make customers abandon Google App Engine is having to pay
a lot for frontend instances. To use a crude analogy, paying a lot for
instances is like paying a lot for SMS messages sent from a cell phone. The
quotas for CPU hours, data storage and bandwidth etc are enough to make
This is really scary. I'm not so obsessed about the price increase as
this is something you can control, but if the HRD starts becoming
slower and slower, there's absolutely nothing you can do. According to
these official graphs, it's literally 2X slower than 1 year ago. I'm
OK with training some
I'm an indie Android app developer, and in early 2010 I decided to work on a
multiplayer crossword board game ala Scrabble or Words With Friends, since
no such game existed yet on the platform. I worked with a friend who handled
the server side. We decided it would be cool to use Java GAE as
Is a 'fee' to cover the costs involved.
In effect it helps cover the cost of the scheduler infrastructure
itself - that handles launching instances. Also things like before an
instance can serve your application, it must download all the your
code from a 'repositiory'. There may be millions of
On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:10 AM, Barry Hunter wrote:
Dont you get one instance (well two until multi-threading) free? - so
you can have a dynamic instance always loaded. (ie you get 24 instance
hours free a day)
You don't get 2 until multi-threading. You get one. They are just reducing
the
If I were in your position, I'd send all your users an email explaining what
you just told us in this message. Heck, just use that message -- it was really
well written.
Then let them decide what's next. Set up a google docs survey. You might be
able to switch to a donation model, or a
Google does not honor the settings on latency tolerance. There is no way to
force only a single instance to be spawned.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Zing!
On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:31 AM, Raymond C. wrote:
Be noted that Google Storage is in PREVIEW. Did GAE teach us sth?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
Hmm, from what I understand it would be possible to keep one instance. Thats
all Free apps get anyway.
I've setup against an app not currently serving other traffic two cronjobs,
on a server here. every 5 minutes, hits a URL (thats your kiosk) - and then
once an hour runs ab -n 30 -c 2 -t 15
I will disagree with this post. We were on MS earlier and now on HRD.
While on MS, we used to have datastore timeouts all the time and it
was driving me insane looking at 20-30k error emails come in. After
the move to HRD, everything is stable and there are no datastore
timeouts anymore. I am
On Sep 2, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Barry Hunter wrote:
Hmm, from what I understand it would be possible to keep one instance. Thats
all Free apps get anyway.
I've setup against an app not currently serving other traffic two cronjobs,
on a server here. every 5 minutes, hits a URL (thats your
Wow, this is very well written. You should make this a blog / G+ /
whatever post.
I also agree that it is quite funny, at IO they were touting Android +
GAE. From what I've seen apps with many lightweight requests are
getting killed with the new pricing; apps with super heavy requests
are
Here's another example of the broken scheduler.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-dryIprRn0bE/TmD-GLgqiKI/SIw/k3RfU7EfbLE/pnengine.JPG
My app lives on around 64-64MB of RAM. Consistenly (the screendump should
testify to that). I've restricted the settings to spawn as few instances as
I remember back to the very first Google I/O, when App Engine was
brand new. During the keynotes, both Vic Gundotra and Marissa Mayer
gave inspiring talks about how Google's mission was to enhance the
user experience, to speed everything up, add millions of new
applications. And that, even by
Another idea, you get 9 hours of backend free a day too. Could you shunt
the 'users' to actully be done via your backend. Leaving the single frontend
instance to serve kiosk traffic?
If I can, then I clearly don't understand what a backend is.
Can you elaborate on this idea?
Its
I think the point of this post is the trend. At one time master-slave
also performed quite well, then we'd see trends where latency
increased until a blowup. These graphs show a similar pattern to
that: increasing latencies over time. We would like to know that: 1)
the trend won't continue, 2)
At least that's the route I'll have to take for my free users. Before
concurrent Python 2.7 releases. Or before I move to Node.js on micro
EC2 with SimpleDB: one year of this configuration costs the same as
one instance running 2mo on GAE.
Angke
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:55 AM, GAEfan
Hi,
there were many different statements about the instance based billing
which were not clear to everyone. We've asked proppy in the IRC
channel to get us some clarification about the rules that apply to
instance based billing. We formulated some assertions and he forwarded
them to the product
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-XGPyxc1vPZg/TmEBu4XmwcI/SI0/Sm1ZEbIuwDA/apen2.JPG
And voila! Just as I was writing the above - a new instane has emerged.
Again it is clear from the screendump that it has no job to do and only
serves to bill me. The idle instance remains alive for
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
