FYI, the following function should be sufficient to register a dynamic kind
in the kind_map:
def addExpandoForKind(kind):
class Dummy(db.Expando):
@classmethod
def _get_kind(cls):
return kind
though it is not a good solution :-) (there are all sorts of memory,
thread and request
I have tried this code, but still it is creating entity as class name (*
DynamicEntity*) not as given my custom entity name(*MyCustomEntity*):
class DynamicEntity(db.Expando):
@classmethod
def _get_kind(cls):
return 'MyCustomEntity'
Thanks Tim Hoffman,
We are creating one app in which, on admin side User can create his own
entities and can create fields in that entity.
So as the documentation I have read, to store any entity in datastore which
have dynamic fields, we have to use ndb or Expando.
But I am getting entity
Hi Vinny,
Thanks for the tips, but actually I'm not loading a file. I'm only using
mapreduce lib for read all the entities for one of my kinds, work with them
(I only read some properties to compose the csv line format) and then I
write to CSV file on cloud storage using mapreduce
Thats because you are using 'db' instead of 'ndb'
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:44 AM, Mitul Golakiya mtl.golak...@gmail.comwrote:
I have tried this code, but still it is creating entity as class name (*
DynamicEntity*) not as given my custom entity name(*MyCustomEntity*):
class
Hi gae team,
Can you please give an update when app engine will start supporting servets
3.0. I am desperately looking for it. I would be grateful if someone could
provide me an approximate date. thanks a lot in advance.
Also can you kindly give us an update when gae will start returning
As I said
I would use a metaclass to create classes on demand.
However you would need to use some name mangling scheme so that each users
class name was garunteed to be unique otherwise
you could end up in all sorts of mess.
Alternately specify an entity name as a property of the class (or use
Ignore the namespace comment.
On Friday, October 11, 2013 5:43:43 PM UTC+8, timh wrote:
As I said
I would use a metaclass to create classes on demand.
However you would need to use some name mangling scheme so that each users
class name was garunteed to be unique otherwise
you could end
Thanks Alftred, It worked...
Thank you so much for you help...
On Friday, October 11, 2013 1:22:22 PM UTC+5:30, Alfred Fuller wrote:
Thats because you are using 'db' instead of 'ndb'
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 12:44 AM, Mitul Golakiya
mtl.go...@gmail.comjavascript:
wrote:
I have tried
No matter what I choose as the app name it says invalid
I guess your servers are broken
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-UAjBByKRIMA/UlfSdbq28XI/J5Q/b1i2kSzqdd4/s1600/createapp.png
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine
Just missed a point : basic scaling instances are still billed like backend
instance hours and not front end hours even for the default module.
So we have only 8 hours offered instead of 28 hours for automatic scaling
instances :-(
Please Google fix this, quick.
Created an issue for it :
Just switched back to automatic scaling and everything seems to be back to
normal, no more crazy instance loading.
There were definitely something buggy on GAE side which seems to have been
fixed.
On Friday, October 11, 2013 1:23:10 PM UTC+2, Francois Masurel wrote:
Just missed a point :
I filed a production issue on this. I suggest everyone who is seeing this
problem do the same.
I also switched the dedicated memcache service until this is fixed. so far
so good.
On Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:58:37 PM UTC-4, James Gilliam wrote:
Here is what I know so far ...
I ran the
Now there is a billing issue with memcache premium. It goes along with
0.00 all day and then plunk all of it at once. It doesn't add the cost
hour by hour -- clearly a bug. The next day, they plunk like 18 hours right
at the beginning of the day, which is rolled back later in the day. But
Still having these same issues nowadays, this is outrageous.
El lunes, 30 de julio de 2012 16:47:00 UTC+1, Mos escribió:
Anyone else seeing issue with GAE instance management?
In one minute - 10 requests - around 5 instances are started. Old ones
do not response. New instances are created
Any news on this? I'm having similar issues nowadays and can't believe this
is not working properly yet.
El miércoles, 1 de agosto de 2012 03:18:26 UTC+1, Kristopher Giesing
escribió:
I've been working for some time on an app I plan to deploy. Over the
development period I have done
Sometimes it has happened to me that when I set the min idle instance to 1,
after some minutes it's again set as automatic.without any consent.
Other thing I have tried is to pause the defauls task queue, since
suddently starts to make a lot of requests, however doesn't look to be the
solution
Sometimes happens to me that when I set the min idle instance to 1, after
some minutes it's again set as automatic.without any consent.
Other thing I have tried is to pause the defauls task queue, since
suddently starts to make a lot of requests, however doesn't look to be the
best solution
I see this bug as well. Dedicated memcache is in preview release, so bugs
like this shouldn't be surprising.
I filed an issue:
https://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=10108
On Friday, October 11, 2013 10:42:18 AM UTC-4, James Gilliam wrote:
Now there is a billing issue
Saturday is the day the love pushing out bad code.
I laughed when I read this. This should be the subtitle of the (largely
useless) App Engine Status page, in bold.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To unsubscribe from
Tasks are piling up waiting for my backend instance to start :
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-aIQFZvUEP5U/UlgdP5dmDuI/80M/VpcdqEpcv7c/s1600/Logs+-+BiblioCities+-+Google+Chrome.jpg
It's a basic scaling instance with a 5 minutes idle timeout (App ID:
bblcts1).
Hoping it's only a
There should be a GAE Legal Defense Fund to represent people when GAE acts
inappropriately. I am totally dependent on GAE for my business and I
suspect many other people are as well. What GAE has done with MEMCACHE is
wrong imo and we need somebody to call them out on this formally. What
I'm still intrigued how you know this is deliberate?
Granted you've had a bad experience, but it does not mean there is a
conspiracy against you.
Have you tried redeploying, will often end up in a different part of the
infrastructure, and so move out of a neighbourhood with a noisy neighbour.
Barry --
I am not arguing a conspiracy at all. I am saying that what GAE did,
whether it be on purpose or not, resulted in a huge increase in the cost of
hosting. It has forced me to opt in for premium memcache. It remains to
be seen if GAE responds to this at all but the history suggests
GAE just responded to the billing issue with the following
Updates:
Status: WorkAsIntended
Comment #1 on issue 10108 by jbelmo...@google.com: dedicated memcache
billed all at once
On 11 October 2013 09:42, James Gilliam jimgill...@gmail.com wrote:
Barry --
I am not arguing a conspiracy at all. I am saying that what GAE did,
whether it be on purpose or not, resulted in a huge increase in the cost of
hosting.
How do you know something was 'changed'? The evience
My billing apps are getting *non sense increases of frontend instances* as
already has been reported
herehttps://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/google-appengine/kLnMk6lmZVk/3XtDjr2sXx8J
or
herehttps://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/google-appengine/rjZhjMEAXUI.
I think it could
Yesterday happened to me that when I set the min idle instance to 1, after
some minutes it was again set as automatic.without any consent. Not sure if
this has been fixed but this is a big problem in terms of expenses for
users specially for low traffics apps.
El viernes, 11 de octubre de
I try and/or evaluate all the suggestions. The worse day for shared
memcache was Saturday. Today and yesterday was much improved. However,
they still more aggressively purge shared memcache than they use to. I
know this because I track it everyday. The premium memcache is great
function
New record :
*
*
*219 ms*
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-QRszitdZ6-s/UlhM_-sFQ7I/80o/Ng4Y1XLG8DM/s1600/Logs+-+BiblioCities+-+Google+Chrome.jpg
When will my tasks get executed on this instance ?
On Friday, October 11, 2013 5:49:19 PM UTC+2, Francois Masurel wrote:
Tasks are piling
Things seem to be back to normal, fingers crossed.
On Friday, October 11, 2013 9:11:19 PM UTC+2, Francois Masurel wrote:
New record :
*
*
*219 ms*
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-QRszitdZ6-s/UlhM_-sFQ7I/80o/Ng4Y1XLG8DM/s1600/Logs+-+BiblioCities+-+Google+Chrome.jpg
When will
Are you still having this problem? I noticed today that *every* request
that I make to get a serving URL is failing with an
ImagesServiceFailureException. I'm not sure how long this has been going
on - a couple of days at most, probably just hours. There was no change in
my code; just the
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Ben Ritchie benjamin.ritc...@gmail.com
wrote:
No matter what I choose as the app name it says invalid
The application name asdfafasdf shown in your screenshot seems to be
legitimately invalid, as I'm getting the same error:
http://imgur.com/oilppL5
You just
I really think you confuse various localised and/or widespread problems
with intent. I just don't see intent
I have been using appengine (totally reliant on it) since 2008. memcache
has always been vague in it's rentention of records. See me earlier
response to this thread , you see I had
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 1:02 PM, James Gilliam jimgill...@gmail.com wrote:
I try and/or evaluate all the suggestions. The worse day for shared
memcache was Saturday. Today and yesterday was much improved. However,
they still more aggressively purge shared memcache than they use to. I
know
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 3:18 AM, srk srikanth.krishnamur...@a-cti.com
wrote:
Can you please give an update when app engine will start supporting
servets 3.0. I am desperately looking for it. I would be grateful if
someone could provide me an approximate date
Is there a particular component
Hi Moises,
we're currently trying to deal with this issue too. Not in mapreduce, just
regular handlers.
same here - Python 2.7 and F2 instances with 256MB
Early on I found that fetching 1000 entities and looping through them to
update a property would blow the instance. Reducing this to say 100
37 matches
Mail list logo
