I always get irritated when people point to that SO article. There are
unanswered questions still and my own experimentation didn't bear out the
algorithm listed there. It might be relevant that the answer was posted
relative to the Python implementation, while I have a Java app, but still.
T
Be careful how you analyze the situation with your instances. When I was
playing with resident instances, I assumed that they represented a "floor"
you wouldn't drop below in times of low traffic, but that's not quite what
they do. Rather, they represent a pool of *deliberately idle* resources
I ended up writing my own solution, which is essentially a replacement for
the channel APIs.
The solution involves a node.js service that multiplexes to the clients. I
used websocket-node (https://github.com/Worlize/WebSocket-Node) on the
node.js end, and SocketRocket (https://github.com/squar
What is AOP in this context?
On Wednesday, May 15, 2013 4:52:51 PM UTC-7, Jeff Schnitzer wrote:
>
> I attended the "Autoscaling Java" session at Google I/O. In summary, the
> advice is:
>
> * Don't use dependency injection.
> * Don't use AOP.
> * Hardcode configuration values as much as possib
I'm having a devil of a time using the logs to debug my application.
There's a basic pattern of access that I'm trying to troubleshoot. In
order to do this, I would like to analyze correlations between the
following properties of requests:
- Request path
- Request status
- Instance ID used to
I don't think so. You just put the X requests into the queues for the N
instances already running. This gives you additional latency for the X
requests, of course - it's not free - but if the latency added is less than
the instance startup time, then it's a better solution than what we have.
Oh, also: Google uses GAE internally. I've always assumed that the primary
motivation for establishing Go support came from inside Google. (Not
necessarily a bad thing - Google is on the cutting edge of web tech in a
lot of ways, so if Google internally sees value in it, there's probably a
go
Comments below...
On Saturday, May 25, 2013 1:01:12 AM UTC-7, Nick wrote:
>
> The logs, while good to have, are a super PITA to use.
>
> Things that would be great to fix:
>
>- The search option labelled 'Since' is exactly the opposite of what
>it says. Everyone i've ever spoken to gets c
uo (Google) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> As Vinny said, certainly BigQuery is something you can consider.
>>> Here is another project for ingesting App Engine logs into BigQuery:
>>> https://code.google.com/p/**log2bq <https://code.google.com/p/log2bq>
>&g
;>>> https://code.google.com/p/**google-app-engine-samples/**
>>>> source/browse/trunk/logparser/**logparser.py<https://code.google.com/p/google-app-engine-samples/source/browse/trunk/logparser/logparser.py>
>>>>
>>>> (Looks like I didn&#
Personally, I found his observations valuable.
On Sunday, June 16, 2013 12:41:02 AM UTC-7, alex wrote:
>
> I don't know where you get your "experience" from but you could've just
> said something like "Go is not for me" or "I don't like Go". Otherwise,
> your post is what looks silly.
>
> -- ale
Do we know Andrew works on GAE specifically, rather than the Go language
and support for it generally?
- Kris
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:44:54 AM UTC-7, vlad wrote:
>
> @Andrew: I do not have any vitriol toward Go or GAE. Think of these posts
> as tough love :). I am GAE's loyal customer sinc
>
> PS : Now that we've got these great new backends and all the goodness of
>> BigQuery, CloudSQL, Datastore, ..., the only remaining "evil problem" in
>> the AppEngine world is the behavior of the dispatcher which sends
>> "user-facing requests to starting instances".
>>
>
> we have engineers
I saw strange instance behavior yesterday just after pushing a new
deployment. I assumed it was something I'd done on my end and was about to
post something. Specifically, I'm seeing a lot of optimistic concurrency
failures from Objectify and those requests are taking a long time to
fulfill, a
Are you sure this is something Google is doing, and not something another
memcache client in your same data center is doing?
A more charitable explanation for all this is that memcache performance is
hard to guarantee without explicit allocations (i.e. the paid option), and
that you've been luc
I'd strongly recommend Objectify as a persistence layer. It's designed for
App Engine and works very well in my experience. Memcache caching is very
easy to enable, nearly transparently.
http://code.google.com/p/objectify-appengine/
- Kris
On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 5:51:19 AM UTC-8, Ja
Yes, it's possible to do this with Google App Engine. There are a lot of
options; you'll need to make some design decisions to start, and then the
documentation can help you with the implementation.
First, you need to decide whether the game state should be stored on the
server or transient.
You could probably still do without the labs jar - I think that is all
optional APIs. (Assuming, of course, that you don't actually use any of
the labs APIs. And, caveat - I haven't actually tried it.)
- Kris
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:48:06 AM UTC-8, Rafael Sanches wrote:
>
> I tried r
I have yet to talk to a GAE user who *didn't* misunderstand this part of
the docs on first read. It's one of the most common issues people have
when they first come to this group.
- Kris
https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/adminconsole/
>>> performancesettings#minimum
>>>
>>
>> This d
Because by definition, resident instances don't serve any traffic. That
means you are eating up 24 instance hours of idle time each day, leaving
you only four hours each day to serve traffic.
I had this exact problem while my app was in development, and I couldn't
figure out why Java developer
This is logged here:
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=7098
I patched the 1.7 channel API locally to deal with it; see the issue
comments.
On Saturday, March 5, 2011 8:02:23 AM UTC-8, Westmark wrote:
>
> Is there any way for the client to terminate the connection while
I've seen 302 errors come from API calls to GAE apps where I accessed the
origin page with http://, and sent the API call relative to the page (thus
also using http://), but the API endpoint requires https://. Could this be
related?
- Kris
PS. I've been pondering whether this is a bug, since
I've been working for some time on an app I plan to deploy. Over the
development period I have done testing on the QA instance of my app (which
is a separate app ID from the one I'll use in production) but have not paid
serious attention to performance since the functionality wasn't yet
comple
Just noticed this thread. I'm seeing this as well. More details here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/google-appengine/rjZhjMEAXUI
On Monday, July 30, 2012 9:37:08 AM UTC-7, Mos wrote:
>
> > Which runtime you are using?
>
> GAE/Java 2.7
>
>
--
You received this message be
Hi Takashi,
Thanks for the prompt response. Info below...
On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:30:58 PM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google) wrote:
>
> Hi Kristopher,
>
> Where are you accessing your app from? Ping result is just for our
> frontend facilities, so it doesn't reflect the real network latency o
So, this behavior is completely reproducible.
1) Shut down all instances.
2) Set min instances to 1 (leave all other sliders at default values).
3) Save settings and wait for instance to spin up.
4) Issue one GET request from browser to a specific API endpoint. This is
an API call so it is not m
The above post notwithstanding, the original problem I was having - which
caused me to try to set min instances to 1 to begin with - seems to have
gone away. I know this is probably going to fall into the PEBCAK bucket,
but I really don't think I did anything in particular to cause the problem,
is built to scale up, not down, but GAE balancing is currently an *order of
magnitude* worse than a naive solution for this problem domain; so even
though the pervasiveness might be low, the severity is very high. IMHO
this needs to be fixed.
- Kris
On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 11:35:50 PM UTC-7, Kri
PS. I once again encountered evidence that appstats is causing requests to
fire even when I'm not actively using the management console, which is very
weird. I've turned off appstats because I didn't really find it all that
useful anyway (and because it causes the dev server not to start when
On Sunday, July 29, 2012 12:43:31 PM UTC-7, Brandon Wirtz wrote:
>
> Why can’t I configure how many requests a backend can handle? Or have a
> back end act like a front end and handle 8?
>
The Java version has an experimental field in backends.xml called
max-concurrent-requests. I would assume
Terrifying.
So, I assume Richard's medium-term plan is to set up an "outboard"
collector endpoint, and have a single GAE backend reap from that?
- Kris
On Tuesday, August 7, 2012 7:10:43 PM UTC-7, Jeff Schnitzer wrote:
>
> If you've been reading various threads on this list you know that
> Ric
I have a Linode instance. How do I run the test?
> BTW I picked Rackspace for this test because I happened to already
> have a VPS there. I would love to see latency numbers for Linode,
> EC2, and Google Compute Engine. Does anyone want to run the test?
> I'm still waiting for an invite to
This is his evidence that higher-use apps have better performance. I'm not
surprised that memcache hit rates would be higher (since you're more likely
to evict your neighbors than vice versa) but the latency difference does
surprise me.
I wonder if Google's balancing algorithms tend to starve
Did your attacker change lines of attack after put in the curl blocking?
Or did the blocking itself not solve the problem?
Here's a thought: use node.js to set up a simple filter (node.js because
it's high throughput for very lightweight operations). For valid traffic,
proxy to your real GAE
ust 8, 2012 9:45:51 PM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> Did your attacker change lines of attack after put in the curl blocking?
> Or did the blocking itself not solve the problem?
>
> Here's a thought: use node.js to set up a simple filter (node.js because
> i
00 PM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> PS. I think it would also be possible to hide the identity of the GAE app
> the filter talks to. That way you can move your GAE app to a different app
> ID, so that the attacker can't hit it directly without going through your
> filt
Until this issue is fixed, I'm stuck on 1.6.3:
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=7282
- Kris
--
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
I think the only client implementation for the channel API is the
JavaScript one. I'd love to be wrong though.
If there is a way to set up a Java (or Python or Go) client for the channel
APIs, you would end up with semi-persistent http connections between
channel service and backend. I don't
Do we know for sure that front ends are any faster? Their individual
throughput limits might just be masked by having more of them spin up.
- Kris
I really don't know why backends are slow. Maybe it has something to
> do with the request queueing system? Throughput sucks even when
> backend
stalled.
- Kris
On Wednesday, August 8, 2012 10:10:09 PM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google)
wrote:
>
> Hi Kristopher,
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Kristopher Giesing
> > wrote:
> > Until this issue is fixed, I'm stuck on 1.6.3:
> >
> > http://code.go
There's a short example of a node.js proxy server here:
http://www.catonmat.net/http-proxy-in-nodejs/
It might not be as hard as you imagine to get this working. I'd hate to
see the attackers win :(
- Kris
On Wednesday, August 8, 2012 10:06:45 PM UTC-7, Kate wrote:
>
> I don't know how to wri
The reason I'm currently using them is to avoid insane instancing behavior
on front ends. (Which is sad, because I'm basically paying extra to avoid
a feature.)
I just commented on your SO post, btw, asking clarification on whether your
rules are only for backends, because I definitely *don't*
That would work up until your data got evicted at the wrong time...
Though this gets me thinking: it would be really, really nice for many
applications to have a *guaranteed* memcached-style in-memory table that
you could use to share data between instances (and between FE/BE). Unlike
memcache
Good point. I had unconsciously assumed that a replicated memcached
solution would be much more efficient than a replicated data store
solution, but if the replication and not the disk I/O is what's expensive,
then that assumption falls down.
Generally speaking, I'm having difficulty architect
I sympathize with your situation, but how many more threads on this do you
need? It's actually harder to help you if the answers to your questions
are so spread out; people are going to forget what has been proposed and
tried already.
I still think the most likely solution is for you to have a
Hi Takashi,
I ran some experiments with an instance that had requests pending only from
my own scripts (no user facing traffic at all).
What I found was that sending requests at about 1req/sec, regularly spaced,
caused GAE to spin up new instances randomly. If I set the min instances
setting
On Friday, August 24, 2012 2:59:11 PM UTC-7, Johan Euphrosine (Google)
wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2012 11:28 PM, "Mos" >
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Johan. I read the post some days before.
> >
> > As often discussed on the mailing-list before and as Jeff said in this
> thread.
> > It's the combination
>
> Like Jon explained in the post I linked, the scheduler will favor routing
>> traffic to idle dynamic instance rather than idle reserved idle instance
>> and it will always try to maintain the invariant of N x Min-Idle-Instances
>> by starting new instance if the reserved instances are busy.
Hi Takashi,
I created a new GAE app to test this and found that I'm not getting the
same instance tuning controls in the new app ID that I am getting in my
current one.
In my current app, I can set both min and max idle instances, and min and
max pending latency.
In the new app, I can set onl
>
> Resident instances are used for processing incoming request if there
> is no dynamic instance
>
This is the behavior we all want, but experimentation seems to indicate it
doesn't happen, at least for some apps.
- Kris
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
eers to
digest.
- Kris
On Monday, August 27, 2012 2:17:47 AM UTC-7, Johan Euphrosine (Google)
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Kristopher Giesing
> > wrote:
> >> Resident instances are used for processing incoming request if there
> >> is no dynamic in
instance should have been spawned.
If I'm misunderstanding something, please clarify, because at the face of
it this seems to be a smoking gun.
- Kris
On Friday, August 31, 2012 8:37:47 AM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google) wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Kristopher Gi
orn by the warmup request.
So, actually, I am baffled. Any ideas, anyone?
- Kris
On Friday, August 31, 2012 9:16:16 PM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> This is the request that I actually issued, being handled:
>
> 2012-07-31 23:08:28.045 /api/game/57002?pretty=true 200 7893
On Friday, August 31, 2012 12:29:20 PM UTC-7, Pascal Patry wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Channels on AppEngine are picky. There are multiple issues that I had to
> work around for an application that is currently in production:
> 1. Channels aren't working on backends
>
Argh, seriously? That is a huge
I thought protocol buffers were designed to minimize bandwidth, not
latency? I don't see how a data transmission format would minimize latency.
I've never had any serious problems with JSON, personally.
- Kris
On Friday, August 31, 2012 8:57:14 AM UTC-7, Brandon Wirtz wrote:
>
> We haven’t had
?
>
> An interesting thing to try is to set up a handler for the warmup
> request which issues an actual query to the datastore. Any query.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Kristopher Giesing
> > wrote:
> > OK. Something just became clearer to me.
>
I thought the Channel API was already based on web sockets (for platforms
that support them).
- Kris
On Sunday, September 2, 2012 3:31:31 PM UTC-7, vlad wrote:
>
> +1 Channels is probably the most overhyped but underwhelming feature on
> GAE. It was launched with lots of hype and high expectat
>
> > 3. The implementation is different from the test and production server
>
> Care to elaborate? (file new Defect if necessary)
>
It's pretty clear to anyone working with the system more than casually that
the implementations are different. I'm not sure that's really a problem; I
mean, th
Actually this is such an open ended question that I think it's not
particularly suited to SO.
Shilendra,
Generally speaking, you should be able to use GAE as a back end for an
iPhone application. I'm aiming to do this and although I have not yet
deployed my app I've learned quite a bit about
My guess is your LinkedIn group is getting the email digests from this
group. I can think of a few ways this might happen:
1) Someone signed up to this Google group with the email address by which
people can directly post to your LinkedIn group
2) Someone has an automatic forwarding rule for th
OK, ready to deploy again, and of course I immediately ran into this issue
(along with a bunch of problems related to channels).
Here are the logs. Note the 7-second gap between the request that created
a new instance, and the immediately preceding instance. Note also that
there was no warmup
PS. This is with default application settings, and for this test I
reverted to using front ends instead of backends (since I gather backends
don't support channels, that's no longer an option for me).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google App Eng
Google's messaging about migration is getting stronger, so I assume the
"why bother" is "so Google doesn't one day shut down my instance".
- Kris
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:30:07 PM UTC-7, Joshua Smith wrote:
>
> I have one such app, and I can tell you that it has had exactly 0 downtime
I think you need to ask someone who knows how content makes it into that
section of the LinkedIn group (such as LinkedIn support). There is surely
some kind of audit trail or spammers would just be able to blast the groups
with noise. I'm not sure anyone on this group will be able to help you.
Reads can be cached through the memcached service, and memcached hits are
free.
If you try GAE, I would highly recommend re-examining your architecture to
make optimal use of GAE's strengths. I haven't released my own app yet,
but when I started I tried to use JDO, and the performance was awfu
To be clear, my problem isn't with startup time per se. My problem is that
despite having an active instance that has been idle for 7 seconds, GAE
decided to spin up a new instance, causing a significant user-visible delay.
Secondarily, I'm puzzled as to why I didn't get a warmup request, but a
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:31:43 AM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google)
wrote:
>
> In a very rare case, App Engine sometimes needs to direct a request to
> another instance(even if there is an idle instance) for some reasons. I
> think this is a nature of a distributed and shared system like Ap
"Almost all"?
Can you please just tell us what the bug was?
- Kris
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 2:56:31 AM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google)
wrote:
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for the info. I think I found the edge case bug on your app(and
> which doesn't affect almost all of other apps). I've esca
When I looked into this recently, I discovered that GAE was actually
sending the new request to the guaranteed idle instance, but then also
spinning up another instance at the same time, making it seem as if the
request were being handled by the cold instance. The 2nd instance spinning
up is w
I'm in what should be the final stages of development prior to deploying my
app. But I can't figure out how to use the Channel API effectively.
What I need out of the system is a way to notify a user of certain events.
If the user is connected by a channel, I use that, but if they aren't, I
w
On Monday, October 22, 2012 5:51:38 AM UTC-7, Takashi Matsuo (Google) wrote:
>
>
> Hi Carl,
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Carl Schroeder
>
> > wrote:
>
>> Has this feature been disabled? Have the requirements for it changed?
>> The "Configured Services" section of my Application Settings
Can you post the relevant logs? Each request is stamped with the ID of the
instance that served it.
When I looked into my own logs I found that the request I thought was
cold-served was actually going to a recently warmed instance, but that the
warmup request didn't fully initialize everything
equests had different IDs than the ones spun up by warmup reqeusts.
> I have an AWS instance that hits my site once every 60s to attempt to
> insure that there is always a dynamic instance loaded. I have 1 resident
> instance configured to "enable" warmups.
>
>
> On Monda
Yeah, I already starred that one.
So... what's the solution? Is there one or do I need to roll my own
channel replacement?
On Monday, October 22, 2012 12:46:43 PM UTC-7, Aleksei Rovenski wrote:
>
> My experience with presence notifications is also that they are
> unreliable.
> Channel API has
The live version uses an embedded iFrame. The dev server version can't
work across domains without modifications, but I have gotten it to work by
adding a method that overrides the base URL.
- Kris
On Monday, October 22, 2012 2:27:28 PM UTC-7, niedbalski wrote:
>
> Hello Chard ...
>
> The big
It should work cross-domain already. Why do you need to configure those
headers?
- Kris
On Monday, October 22, 2012 2:11:27 PM UTC-7, niedbalski wrote:
>
> Hello guys,
>
> Do you know any way or workaround to get the channel service working with
> cross-domain requests? Is possible
> to config
012 2:10:20 PM UTC-7, niedbalski wrote:
>
> Hi Kristopher,
>
> On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 3:15:02 AM UTC-3, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
>> The live version uses an embedded iFrame. The dev server version can't
>> work across domains without modifications, but
lly served files, at least on iOS devices. Your use case may be
different.
- Kris
On Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:48:26 AM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> I added a function like this to the channel javascript:
>
> goog.appengine.DevSocket.setConnecti
rgely
transparent to the client, abstracted behind a class that knows how to
connect to the messaging service and fan out resulting messages. If people
are interested I'll post the solution somewhere when it's done.
- Kris
On Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:52:55 AM UTC-7, Kristopher G
channels code, it is basically covered with all
> kinds of workarounds like this :(
>
> вторник, 23 октября 2012 г., 9:10:06 UTC+3 пользователь Kristopher Giesing
> написал:
>>
>> Yeah, I already starred that one.
>>
>> So... what's the solution? Is there one
On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 7:49:34 AM UTC-8, Brandon Wirtz wrote:
> I can also assure you it was not a move to CloudFlare.
>
>
Zing! Not boring.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google App Engine" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
On Friday, November 23, 2012 3:18:22 AM UTC-8, alex wrote:
>
>
> I already imagined you've tried everything up to a point to consider
> you and your team to be experts in every single subject. I thought I'd
> waste time in this thread only because I didn't want too many other
> people consider
I have an update on plans to migrate off the channel APIs.
I looked at both socket.io and sockjs, and neither one of them turned out
to be acceptable. socket.io's error handling has some serious issues, and
sockjs doesn't pass cookies in the connection request (intentionally - they
claim it's
On Friday, November 23, 2012 11:45:56 PM UTC-8, Jeff Schnitzer wrote:
>
> Hmmm... I was planning to sit this discussion out, but some of this is
> unfair.
>
> The support-related complaints are certainly legit. "Never have humans do
> well what algorithms can do badly" is woven deep into the f
Two thoughts:
First, GAE's technology doesn't scale down to small projects, and its
support model doesn't scale up to large ones. That spells trouble, to me.
Second, I suspect Google is running experiments on GAE. By this I don't
just mean playing around with technology; I mean the specific
I just released Titan HD for iPad 2.0 with online multiplayer support.
This is a turn-based board game. It uses GAE for most game logic but I
had to add another server to handle some things GAE couldn't (specifically,
live connection multiplexing using WebSockets).
I can give you a rundown of
PS. None of what I did is open source and I would probably want to clean a
lot of stuff up before releasing it, although the thought has crossed my
mind more than once.
On Thursday, December 13, 2012 11:16:47 AM UTC-8, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> I just released Titan HD for iPad 2.
Issues like this seem to plague low traffic projects much more than high
traffic ones:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/google-appengine/icdr3dcuoew
However, it's possible this is specific to the Java implementation.
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 4:41:19 PM UTC-8, Brandon Thom
I've seen problems with the Channel API where both sides of the connection
were "half open", i.e. each side believed there was a connection but
messages would not be sent.
I eventually replaced the Channel API with a node.js service running
WebSockets. The GAE app posts messages to this servic
This is exactly my experience. I would recommend to anyone considering use
of the Channel APIs that they find an alternative.
- Kris
On Friday, January 4, 2013 12:15:33 AM UTC-8, Aleksei Rovenski wrote:
>
> I can confirm this issue. It is there from August, it was the first time I
> noticed at
16s average latency though...
On Monday, January 7, 2013 12:02:55 PM UTC-8, Brandon Wirtz wrote:
>
> We are doing load testing.
>
>
>
>
--
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://gr
I set up a duplicate app ID for beta testing. Would that work for you?
- Kris
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 1:33:21 PM UTC-8, Carl Schroeder wrote:
>
> We still have this bug in spades.
>
> We can no longer give access to beta java versions (they are non-default)
> because they are unusable in
I'm not sure Google has ever admitted there is a problem to be fixed.
On Thursday, January 31, 2013 11:30:32 AM UTC-8, Michael Hermus wrote:
>
> I have seriously considered moving user facing functionality to a default
> python version (dynamic web pages and Ajax calls) but the effort would be
>
The behavior is expected, but rewriting in Python or Go may allow cold
instances to spin up faster, which does alleviate the resulting user impact.
On Thursday, January 31, 2013 12:57:03 PM UTC-8, Igor Kharin wrote:
>
> Hello Mike,
>
> > If I rewrite the backend from Java to Python (or Go) will
On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 1:34:49 PM UTC-8, Francois Masurel wrote:
>
> Only one new instance started over the last hour.
>
> Yesterday, at the same time, it was 2 instance loading requests every 3
> minutes.
>
> Google definitely fixed something on their side.
>
> Thanx guys. But please, do
Image didn't come through, here is the url:
http://topped-with-meat.com/~kgiesing/instances.1.31.png
On Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:36:06 PM UTC-8, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 1:34:49 PM UTC-8, Francois Masurel wrote:
>>
>> Only one new in
I've never been able to validate the algorithm there with my own app. As
mentioned in the comments to that answer, I've definitely seen new
instances spawn when (to the best of my ability to tell) none of the listed
criteria were true.
Perhaps it would be a good idea if, in the "This request s
That typically means your app returned a 500 error code to whatever was
fetching the document (it's not clear below whether you're running in a
browser or making an API call from an app or something else).
You should check the admin console for the deployed app and go to the logs
section. Any
I've implemented a multiplayer board game using an iOS client and a GAE
service. I'd be more than happy to talk about my experiences. If you
search for my posts on this forum you'll probably find earlier mentions of
the overall architecture, or if you want more specific information I can
foll
You don't mention which language you're using. If this is Java, you'd call
response.sendError(int errorCode, String message) on the servlet's
HttpServletResponse input argument, but I don't know offhand what it would
be in Go, Python, or PHP.
- Kris
On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 1:06:44 PM UTC-7, M
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
