On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:04:44 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Rafael >
> wrote:
>
>> The scheduler logic
>>
>
>
> Regarding the scheduler, this is my favorite thread regarding the subject:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/sA3o-PTAckc/T2
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:04:44 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Rafael >
> wrote:
>
>> The scheduler logic
>>
>
>
> Regarding the scheduler, this is my favorite thread regarding the subject:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/sA3o-PTAckc/T2
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:04:44 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Rafael >
> wrote:
>
>> The scheduler logic
>>
>
>
> Regarding the scheduler, this is my favorite thread regarding the subject:
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/sA3o-PTAckc/T2
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Rafael wrote:
> The scheduler logic
>
Regarding the scheduler, this is my favorite thread regarding the subject:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/sA3o-PTAckc/T2eA64xZ1m0J
It's a bit long (over 100+ posts) but it has some interesting discussion.
On Saturday, February 22, 2014 2:22:56 AM UTC+8, Rafael Sanches wrote:
>
> The scheduler logic doesn't make any sense for java apps. For frontend
> serving I would rather just use a scheduler that boots one instance at time
> and would spread traffic linearly through all instances. This would b
The scheduler logic doesn't make any sense for java apps. For frontend
serving I would rather just use a scheduler that boots one instance at time
and would spread traffic linearly through all instances. This would be more
reliable due to the issues with warm up.
I have to keep 6 useless instances
On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir >
> wrote:
>
>> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the
>> real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right?
>> And for the 15 minutes tax de
On Friday, February 21, 2014 3:29:37 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir >
> wrote:
>
>> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the
>> real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right?
>> And for the 15 minutes tax de
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Tapir wrote:
> So for the app with warmup problems, to avoid the warmup the problem, the
> real free hours would be only a little more than 4 hours, right?
> And for the 15 minutes tax design, the "a little more than 4 hours" is
> about several minutes in fact, ri
On Friday, February 21, 2014 2:58:35 PM UTC+8, Vinny P wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Tapir >
> wrote:
>
>> Resident instances do serve traffic. All the traffic of my paid python
>> app are served by the resident instance. Part of the traffic of my paid
>> java app are also serve
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Tapir wrote:
> Resident instances do serve traffic. All the traffic of my paid python app
> are served by the resident instance. Part of the traffic of my paid java
> app are also served by the resident instance.
>
Resident instances do serve traffic, but most
On Friday, February 21, 2014 1:11:12 AM UTC+8, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> 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.
>
Resident instances
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
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 7:22:05 PM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 6:45:43 PM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
My app is still in the development stage. It has a sm
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Tapir wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 6:45:43 PM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> My app is still in the development stage. It has a small traffic now (<
>>> 1000 pageviews/day).
>>> I really need a workable configuration which wil
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 6:45:43 PM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> My app is still in the development stage. It has a small traffic now (<
>> 1000 pageviews/day).
>> I really need a workable configuration which will make sure it will never
>> be charged more than 28 hours
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 6:45:43 PM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> My app is still in the development stage. It has a small traffic now (<
>> 1000 pageviews/day).
>> I really need a workable configuration which will make sure it will never
>> be charged more than 28 hours
>
>>
>>
>
> My app is still in the development stage. It has a small traffic now (<
> 1000 pageviews/day).
> I really need a workable configuration which will make sure it will never
> be charged more than 28 hours.
>
>
In general there isn't one. Other than disabling billing, so you can't use
anyt
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:49:53 PM UTC+8, Tapir wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>>
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>>
On Wedne
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>>
On Wedne
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>>
On Wedne
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>>
On Wedne
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:18:50 AM UTC+8, Kristopher Giesing wrote:
>
> 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
>
I'm an old user o
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 2:26:52 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>>
On Wedne
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
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Tapir wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:04:15 AM UTC+8, Rishi Arora wrote:
It really doesn't mat
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 1:44:35 AM UTC+8, barryhunter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir >wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:04:15 AM UTC+8, Rishi Arora wrote:
>>>
>>> It really doesn't matter it a second instance kicks in to process your
>>> user-fa
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:05 AM, Tapir wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:04:15 AM UTC+8, Rishi Arora wrote:
>>
>> It really doesn't matter it a second instance kicks in to process your
>> user-facing requests. If your max_idle_instances is set to 1, then you're
>> only paying for o
On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:04:15 AM UTC+8, Rishi Arora wrote:
>
> It really doesn't matter it a second instance kicks in to process your
> user-facing requests. If your max_idle_instances is set to 1, then you're
> only paying for one idle instance at any given time.
Really?! Any
It was announced just 4 days ago, in response to developer concerns for
small size apps.
http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/09/few-adjustments-to-app-engines-upcoming.html
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 5:52 PM, dloomer wrote:
> Interesting. I didn't know about the 28 instance hours, since under
Interesting. I didn't know about the 28 instance hours, since under the
"Estimated Charges Under New Pricing" section of my billing history it still
shows 24 free instance hours. Thanks for that info.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google App En
It really doesn't matter it a second instance kicks in to process your
user-facing requests. If your max_idle_instances is set to 1, then you're
only paying for one idle instance at any given time. Remember that
"max_idle_instances=1" doesn't mean "max_instances=1". I do agree your
concerns, and
I have a simple webcam app used by a maximum of maybe 3 people at any time,
which also handles requests from a batch process initiated from my house
which uploads a new image to my app every 15 seconds via HTTP call to my
app's frontend. My goal is to get the app running on just a single fronte
34 matches
Mail list logo
