Probably they think what they mentioned here is enough??
http://code.google.com/p/twitter-api/issues/detail?id=617
Testing 20k calls for each user might be difficult .May be we should verify
this when IP is not whitelisted.I believe for many sites, it is not uncommon
to expect 200 users/hour with
On Jul 25, 4:47 am, srikanth reddy wrote:
> @Bill Kocik
>
> << 3. Repeat step 1. Do both users now see 19,999? Or does one see 19,999
> and one see 20,000?
>
> jim renkel and sjepers have already tested this.I also verified with two
> different accounts.
> onhttp://twxlate.com
> Guess what ?
@ Hwee-Boon
> Isn't this what I said?
i dont think so. I (and i think everyone) interpreted it as 20k limit to IP
for all users if ip is whitelisted else the limit is 150 per user.
@Bill Kocik
<< 3. Repeat step 1. Do both users now see 19,999? Or does one see 19,999
and one see 20,000?
>>
jim
On Jul 24, 4:13 am, Hwee-Boon Yar wrote:
> Isn't this what I said?
I don't think it is. I think your take is correct. What's telling is
this bit of text from up the chain: "It appears to me that each user
of a white-listed site gets 20k requests per hour".
I don't believe it's true that each
If this is correct (and I don't think it is), then it's very different
from what has always been my understanding. I've stated a few times on
this list my belief that if you're going to be supporting a
significant number of simultaneous users, whitelisting works against
you. No one has ever challe
Isn't this what I said?
--
Hwee-Boon
On Jul 24, 2:36 pm, srikanth reddy wrote:
> @jim.renkel. Thanks a ton. I think now it is clear.
>
> < requests per hour, independent of any other users of that site or *any
> other uses of the twitter API at other sites by that user *>>
>
> probably this is
@jim.renkel. Thanks a ton. I think now it is clear.
<>
probably this is what they mean by
*"IP whitelisting takes precedence to account rate limits*. *GET requests
from a whitelisted IP address made on a user's behalf will be deducted from
the whitelisted IP's limit, not the users*."
If the IP
My experience with this is, I think, a little bit different than what
you describe.
It appears to me that each user of a white-listed site gets 20k
requests per hour, independent of any other users of that site or any
other uses of the twitter API at other sites by that user.
I didn't think this
> In other words, you have a web app running on a single server with a
> single IP. You make authenticated requests using each user's account.
> If your IP is whitelisted, the calls go towards your 20k limit, if it
> is not whitelisted, it goes against the current 150 limit for the
> respective ac
Ohh. Then one user can make 150 authorized calls via consumer and deny
service to others :(
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Hwee-Boon Yar wrote:
>
> It's working like you want it to be.
>
> In other words, you have a web app running on a single server with a
> single IP. You make authenticated
It's working like you want it to be.
In other words, you have a web app running on a single server with a
single IP. You make authenticated requests using each user's account.
If your IP is whitelisted, the calls go towards your 20k limit, if it
is not whitelisted, it goes against the current 150
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 02:02, srikanth reddy wrote:
> The whole confusion is regarding this statement in
> http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Rate-limiting
>
> "IP whitelisting takes precedence to account rate limits. *GET requests
> from a whitelisted IP address made on a user's behalf will be deducted
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com>wrote:
<<
Each user and each IP has 150 calls/hour. If five applications (desktop or
web) are making calls on behalf of a single user or IP they count against
the same 150. Rate limiting has no connection to applications.
>>
Ag
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 15:06, srikanth reddy wrote:
> @Abraham: Does it mean my consumer app (not Desktop client) cannot serve
> more than 150 authorized users/hour(if it is not white listed). It is hard
> to believe.
> If it is desktop client the 150 limit is understandable.
>
Each user and eac
@Abraham: Does it mean my consumer app (not Desktop client) cannot serve
more than 150 authorized users/hour(if it is not white listed). It is hard
to believe.
If it is desktop client the 150 limit is understandable.
The blog post says
"This limit applies to your Twitter account rather than the
In your first email you said "When I check an oAuth'd user's rate limit, he
also seems gets 2 API hits." so I'm not sure what you are seeing.
Also it used to be that user requests from a whitelisted IP would reflect on
the users limit unless they had hit their rate limit at which point it would
@Abraham: If that were true then calling rate_limit_status should give
the same result... which it doesn't!
On Jul 22, 3:26 pm, Abraham Williams <4bra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I recommend that you both read:http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Rate-limiting
>
> Serge: If you have an IP that is white listed
I recommend that you both read: http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Rate-limiting
Serge: If you have an IP that is white listed all applicable calls from that
IP will count against the 2 limit.
Srikanth: That blog post says that twitter.com has no limit. It says nothing
about anybody else not having a
Hi
I am also looking for this. The following post says there is no limit on
calls from application
http://tweetdeck.posterous.com/what-does-rate-limit-exceeded
Rate limit is applicable on Get methods from ip/client.
Can someone confirm if one can make unlimited calls (from an app) to get
request
19 matches
Mail list logo
