r ended
>- Any other relevant logs you think may be related
>
> If/when filing a public issue, feel free to link to it here so that others
> that may also be encountering this can follow through and support the
> report. Thanks for your patience.
>
> On Wednesday, Januar
24 hours ago started getting constant errors - it's not even hitting my
code...
'str' object has no attribute 'get_payload'
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
"/base/data/home/runtimes/python27/python27_lib/versions/third_party/webapp2-2.5.2/webapp2.py",
line 1535, in __call__
rv =
the original console was built by engineers who
used app engine and the new console is built with engineers who were told
to 'make it better' but don't use app engine at all. Some really basic
stuff is missing.
On Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 3:46:19 PM UTC-8, johnP wrote:
>
> Ju
I suppose the 'constructive suggestion' in this case is to include a
'refresh' button on all screens :)
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 10:16:09 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
>
>
> Glad this issue is getting lots of attention. Another major issue for me
> is the Instances viewer. The orig
23, 2016 at 3:52:19 PM UTC-8, PK wrote:
>>
>> We also need the “Billing/Usage History” equivalent functionality, has
>> this page been migrated to the new console?
>>
>> PK
>> p...@gae123.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 23, 2016, a
Just got email that old appengine console will be shut off in 6 weeks. The
new cloud console does not have a "migrate traffic" option in the Versions
screen. This was my absolute favorite new feature in a long, long time.
Will it be available in the new console?
--
You received this
Started getting these periodically. Couple times a day for a week. Python
2.7. Looks like it's totally internal to Google, although who knows.
Maybe I'm triggering it somehow. Tried to wait for a week for it to clear
up on its own. No luck.
1.
E2014-10-21 06:00:34.955
occasions, this is a side effect of your request exceeding its deadline.
The runtime probably tries to flush the logs first and that masks the real
condition.
PK
On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:22 AM, johnP jo...@thinkwave.com javascript:
wrote:
Started getting these periodically. Couple
that SSL will nor be suddenly cut
off. Alternately, I'd like to be pointed to the documentation of what
should be done in cases like mine.
Thank you -
johnP
On Thursday, July 4, 2013 8:39:41 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Hello -
After a HR Migration, I disabled billing for my original app, which
Hello -
After a HR Migration, I disabled billing for my original app, which was
using VIP SSL for my custom domain. On my new aliased app, I do not see
charges for SSL, although SSL continues to work just fine (for free?).
Will SSL settings transfer automatically, or do I need to do so
So am ready to finalize a switch from MS to HR and... My email quota
remains @ 100. That will harm my customer base.
I tried to reset the quota by making an early payment, but that did not
have a result. I submitted two 'change quota' requests, and have not
received a response.
So,
This morning, copying suddenly started moving quickly and the job finished
in several hours. So whatever was done in the background, it worked :)
Thank you.
On Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:52:56 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
I am performing our migration from MS to HR for an app with maybe 35
:56 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
I am performing our migration from MS to HR for an app with maybe 35
million entities. I initiated the copy tool about 65 hours ago and it has
been in the 'copy' stage for about 40 hours (it was testing for integrity,
or something, for the first 23 hours
My migration seems to be stuck for the past 2-3 days too. I'm afraid to
click 'revert' because I'd rather be stuck going forward than stuck going
backwards.
On Sunday, June 23, 2013 8:11:49 AM UTC-7, Edward Zhou wrote:
My app was Master/Slave ModeAccording to Google's guide, I use
Any update? Did the issue resolve eventually?
On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 9:08:23 PM UTC-7, Dmitry Kononov wrote:
Hi!
Yesterday I started migration for m0n0wall-mod application from old
Master/Slave to HRD datastore.
After several hours passed migration stuck at Copy stage.
I decided to
these observations just for the record, I suppose.
On Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:52:56 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
I am performing our migration from MS to HR for an app with maybe 35
million entities. I initiated the copy tool about 65 hours ago and it has
been in the 'copy' stage for about 40
/unpredictable, or is it just this first
part?
3. If not, what should I do to reset the process? Do I need to use
premium support to have someone to rejigger something in the copy process?
johnP
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group
So I am one of the lucky ones who adopted Appengine very early. Now is a
quiet period for our (semi-seasonal) business, so I started the migration
from MS -- HR. 24 hours later, some questions:
1. In the first (almost) 24 hours, about 86 blobs and maybe 16 entities
have copied from one app
Is there any updates on this issue? I starred the issue, etc. But then
radio silence. Are others still having this error condition? I definitely
am having lots of Deadline Errors on URL_Fetch.
On Friday, May 17, 2013 12:38:55 AM UTC-7, John Wheeler wrote:
Starred. Thanks
On Thu, May
Barry -
If you look through this message board and at the issue tracker, you'll see
that many people with HRD are also affected by this issue.
As often is the case, the big problem is not the crime - it's the cover-up.
Everyone here can understand technical issues, if people are working to
, and c
to maximize performance; that would also provide some clarity.
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 9:17:17 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Barry -
If you look through this message board and at the issue tracker, you'll
see that many people with HRD are also affected by this issue.
As often
fanfare.
Google's timescale on fixing issues, is also almost certainly orders of
magnitude slower than most people would like.
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 4:17 PM, johnP jo...@thinkwave.com javascript:
wrote:
Barry -
If you look through this message board and at the issue tracker
Just watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218
Whenever you hear Dead Parrot, in your mind think Dead Instance.
It is a very accurate representation of Google's response to this issue to
date.
On Monday, March 4, 2013 4:35:32 PM UTC-8, Kiran Nanisetti wrote:
My app id is
There are lots of posts lately about bad serving performance across many
configurations. There have also lots of posts questioning why Google has
not acknowledged any of the posts.
There are clearly serving issues. There is clearly no reaction, over an
extended period of time.
On
This morning is a serving train-wreck here, too.
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 7:50:47 AM UTC-8, Kinesh Patel wrote:
On Python 2.7 paid app. Setting an idle instance seems to mitigate this,
but every time a new dynamic instance is spawned or hit i get this problem.
Definitely not
Good advice. Tossing the Skittles in the trash, and running off to buy
some Starburst.
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:52:45 PM UTC-8, Cesium wrote:
Working fine now.
I found the problem.
I fed the unicorns Starburst instead of Skittles.
What an abbey-lubber!
David
On
.)
David
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 2:57:39 PM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Good advice. Tossing the Skittles in the trash, and running off to buy
some Starburst.
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:52:45 PM UTC-8, Cesium wrote:
Working fine now.
I found the problem.
I fed
.
The problem was caused by feeding them Starburst instead of Skittles!
And not just any flavor. It's gotta be the Sour Skittles.
(Makes them fart rainbows, you know.)
David
On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 2:57:39 PM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Good advice. Tossing the Skittles
Our app too is having user-facing 500 errors (does not hit our code), and
other nasty serving issues.
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013 11:30:39 AM UTC-8, Tomas wrote:
From yesterday I observe that app engine spins new instance which serves
requests for couple of seconds and then kill it
Yesterday to a lesser extent, and today to a very serious degree, we have
been seeing very extreme serving problems. This is for an application that
has been running very stably and well for a long time.
Many user-facing 500 errors that never hit our code.
Many deadline exceeded errors.
is dying and I just have not received word yet.
johnP
On Friday, November 23, 2012 10:17:33 AM UTC-8, Brandon Wirtz wrote:
*Couldn’t agree more.*
* *
In the past, quota limits were based on 2 conflicting objectives:
- discouraging people from building non-scalable applications
That's strange - I just tried testing this on my site, and it does redirect
(as far as I can tell... :) Are you using VIP SSL? I am... Maybe there
is a difference in implementation, which makes a difference. It might be
worth the $40/month in your case :)
On Thursday, October 25, 2012
on this issue without escalating to rants written
in all caps?
johnP
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 11:20:52 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Just a bit confused why emails sent by my app are not being signed with
DKIM.
1. On my Google Apps dashboard, it says that my domain is Authenticating
email
? Is the
$500 paid support the only viable alternative? Do they respond to
questions to people who purchase the paid support?
johnP
On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 11:20:52 AM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Just a bit confused why emails sent by my app are not being signed with
DKIM.
1. On my
Thanks for finding that, Waleed. I'll monitor that thread to see if
anything changes.
johnP
On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 3:25:58 PM UTC-7, Waleed wrote:
Confirmed there is a problem on Google side:
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!category-topic/apps/verification-and-mx-records
Just a bit confused why emails sent by my app are not being signed with
DKIM.
1. On my Google Apps dashboard, it says that my domain is Authenticating
email
2. I seem to have my DNS TXT record setup using the specified values
(also, am assuming if I have the green-light for authenticating
Are you using a VIP certificate? If so, you need to change the cname, as
Cayden said. The ghs cname does not support VIP - SNI only.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
VIP SSL for custom domains, as I understand, means Virtual IP. I had a
domain foo.com and recently activated VIP SSL for the domain.
Question:
a. Am I correct in understanding that httpS://foo.com will always resolve
to one IP Address?
b. Does that mean that http://foo.com will also
I was working through a theory that the user's DNS might be stuck from
our pre-ssl days. Maybe their computer clock has been reset. Dunno :)
On Thursday, July 5, 2012 2:53:23 PM UTC-7, barryhunter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:33 PM, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
VIP SSL for custom
that has not refreshed the DNS cache.
johnP
On Thursday, July 5, 2012 4:58:42 PM UTC-7, Cayden Meyer wrote:
Hi John,
On 6 July 2012 05:33, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
Question:
a. Am I correct in understanding that httpS://foo.com will always
resolve to one IP Address?
When you
Iain -
Thank you - your answer resolved my issue.
johnP
On Thursday, July 5, 2012 7:58:03 PM UTC-7, Iain Wade wrote:
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 10:14 AM, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
We are using a CName aliased to ghs.google.com
just to be clear, ghs.google.com is not the VIP CNAME
I was assuming that this would be the 'big announcement' at the IO
conference. I guess you confirmed it :)
On Sunday, June 24, 2012 6:16:33 PM UTC-7, Emanuele Ziglioli wrote:
On Monday, 25 June 2012 12:15:08 UTC+12, Cayden Meyer wrote:
Hi Emanuele,
Can you explain what you mean by
Did you include this import in you deferred module?
from google.appengine.ext.webapp import template
Guido Van Rossum includes this import in his example application
because it makes many django import issues go away.
johnP
On Jun 5, 2:43 am, Amine Azariz amine.aza...@greendizer.com wrote
Is this using python the 2.7 version of cPickle, or are you using
python 2.5 with the Python Pickle aliased to cPickle?
johnP
On Jun 1, 10:41 pm, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
Nice. I like it. Going to try playing with your method vs some of the things
I tried. But I suspect you
On Reitveldt - Guido Van Rossom's example django app, he includes the
following:
# Import webapp.template. This makes most Django setup issues go
away.
from google.appengine.ext.webapp import template
So I included that line, and so far so good :)
johnP
On Jun 1, 4:00 am, Takashi Matsuo
Hm - I wonder if this might be related... I have a django app
configured similarly to CodeReview, and started getting flurries of:
type 'exceptions.UnboundLocalError': local variable 'resolver'
referenced before assignment
Traceback (most recent call last):
File
Mine was a Django Bug addressed in v 1.3
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/13684
and was addressed in the production bug list
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=5795
This is to follow up on / close out previous post.
johnP
On May 14, 12:56 pm, johnP j
Man from Italy, and mamma cannot make you coffee?
On Apr 2, 8:37 am, alex a...@cloudware.it wrote:
This morning I walked into my office only to find out that my black coffee
supply was depleted.
It's been about 4 years since GAE has been released to the public and yet,
it is not capable
Brandon - finally a post of yours that I can agree with :)
On Mar 26, 6:12 pm, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
Wow, I'm very impressed
Waleed is the sleeping giant on this list. Every so often he steps out of
the shadow says something like I made this change and it cut my instances
Yes - please do so
johnP
(I originally gave permission on 1 MAR).
On Mar 19, 1:02 pm, Arie Ozarov oza...@google.com wrote:
Thanks John,
Issue 6858 was closed as we were waiting to get your permission to
remove/cleanup the failed backup.
Failure was triggered by a partial failure
is available I would suggest you to avoid backing up more than
15 kinds at a time (this should handle the worst case of 1 entity per kind).
Arie.
On Monday, March 19, 2012 1:47:52 PM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
Yes - please do so
johnP
(I originally gave permission on 1 MAR).
On Mar 19
I have a production ticket to clear a stuck backup for over 6 weeks.
If you find a way to remedy the situation, I'd like to be 'next in
line' :)
johnP
On Mar 16, 10:28 am, Arie Ozarov oza...@google.com wrote:
Hi Yegor,
Looks like something went wrong with this backup and it likely
Issue 6858 in googleappengine
Thanks!
johnP
On Mar 16, 6:06 pm, Arie Ozarov oza...@google.com wrote:
Hi John,
What is your ticket id?
Arie.
On Friday, March 16, 2012 2:36:56 PM UTC-7, johnP wrote:
I have a production ticket to clear a stuck backup for over 6 weeks.
If you
get refunded for the excess charges?
c. My appid is thinkwave3; can it be moved back to a legacy serving
platform?
Thank you.
johnP
On Mar 15, 12:48 pm, toonetown nathan.to...@gmail.com wrote:
That's great! I mis-read that comment before, and thought it had to do
with a billing issue
Thanks alot, Brandon, for the excellent advice.
On Mar 15, 1:27 pm, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
b. Will we get refunded for the excess charges?
There is no SLA on M/S
Move to HR
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine
Wonderful writing!!! You should receive a Pullet surprise!!!
On Mar 15, 4:26 pm, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
Thanks alot, Brandon, for the excellent advice.
I am considering making an auto responder:
Dear Google App Engine Patron,
Thank you for your inquiry about why your
Launched the backup task on Tuesday evening. It immediately spent a
bunch of money. Now, it's Friday - and there is still one task
'Active'. What should I do?
Thanks.
johnP
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To post
Appid: thinkwave3
Production issue: filed.
Thank you!
johnP
On Feb 3, 8:16 am, Johan Euphrosine pro...@google.com wrote:
Also feel free to fill a production issue including all the
details:http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/entry?template=Produc...
Thanks in advance
using Appengine Patch - and although after the maintenance, there has
been an increase in DeadlineExceeded errors, there has not been a
fundamental 'app is unusable' change for me.
On Dec 8, 9:10 am, Dennis dennisf...@gmail.com wrote:
I have not changed my code in weeks, but in the past few
My corner of the cloud is affected this morning.
So +1 from me on this issue.
johnP
On Nov 29, 9:06 am, Kenneth kennet...@aladdinschools.com wrote:
I reckon it's a problem with our little corner of bigtable. Star this
issue if you want:
http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues
Second try... Wondering if anyone has an answer to these questions.
Thanks!
On Nov 14, 8:14 am, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
My data currently on MS is organized into entities.
- For example, let's say that each Organization is it's own entity
group.
Most of my queries are within
My data currently on MS is organized into entities.
- For example, let's say that each Organization is it's own entity
group.
Most of my queries are within an entity/organization. An example of a
typical query is:
- Employee.all().filter('organization =', org).filter('position =',
a test migration, test/update code until
it's reliable on HRD (freely, without worrying about damaging user
data), and only then do an actual migration.
johnP
On Nov 9, 3:22 pm, Kenneth kennet...@aladdinschools.com wrote:
Do you have any sample code for downloading and uploading blobs? Or am I
Jeff - thanks for the link to Cloudflare. It certainly seems like an
interesting option. The risk with implementing them is that it's one
more layer that can fail. Does anyone else have feedback about how
well it works?Also, does anyone have thoughts on whether the other
benefits of
You can transactionally launch a deferred task with a future ETA that
will clear the Memcache.
johnP
On Sep 6, 9:55 am, Joshua Smith joshuaesm...@charter.net wrote:
And you and your users are happy with this, Tom?
I've been thinking more about entity groups, since they make this consistency
? How do you
know that it's safe to do a query?
Can some people who have been using HR for a while weigh in on the longest
delay they've ever seen to consistency to be achieved?
On Sep 6, 2011, at 1:13 PM, johnP wrote:
You can transactionally launch a deferred task with a future
Which leads to a potential constructive suggestion. Maybe Goog can
post a troubleshooting guide that lists different line-items in the
new-style billing, and potential gotchas? An example in your blog is
that sudden parallelism is costly and that making things serial is a
good optimization.
I think in webmaster tools you can change crawl-rate preferences.
Otherwise - just block it with robots.txt.
On Sep 3, 12:35 pm, Brandon Wirtz drak...@digerat.com wrote:
The biggest Problem I have with the Scheduler/GAE isn't GAE it is Google
Bot.
Under the new model you are on the hook for
the 1.5.2 release.
It might be that your other app (the one not getting this deadline exceeded
errors) its on High Replication Datastore.
FYI, this issues are not related to SDK releases.
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:31 AM, johnP jo...@thinkwave.com wrote:
Tons more deadline errors
Tons more deadline errors... It's been bad for a couple of weeks, but
even worse in the past few days.
On Aug 9, 12:23 am, Johan Euphrosine pro...@google.com wrote:
Can you open a production isse with your
appid:http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/entry?template=Produc...
, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
Amen - temporary read-only is fine. The big problem is that my app
makes use of a ton of keys, and in many cases I need to store the keys
as strings (or store keys in pickled blobs). The real chore is to
write scripts to rebuild all the keys after
August 2011 10:13, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
can you clarify: You need to persist re-read the Entities and persist
them as keys.
If your entities are stored as a String, or a list of strings, you
will need to read the entities, and change their type to be either a
Key (or reference
My question was unclearly formulated. I intended to ask, would it be
possible to do what I described *after* the migration? In other
words, would calling db.Key() on the str(old_key) 'convert' it to the
new key? My plan is to do a simple brute-force copy, then convert
keys on-demand in a lazy
Sorry - I got the link wrong earlier. It is:
http://blog.shnap.com/migrating-to-the-google-app-engine-high-repli
johnP
On Aug 4, 10:13 pm, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
My question was unclearly formulated. I intended to ask, would it be
possible to do what I described *after
the app ID will also preserve these
keys...
please???
johnP
On Aug 3, 1:02 pm, Will Reiher wrele...@gmail.com wrote:
Ikai,
That's great news! I'm not so worried about a temporary read-only period
it's the the idea of switching the application id that was scary. I've
already done it once
sending to
memcache to get a significant performance boost.
johnP
On Jul 13, 9:37 pm, Feng xnite...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I have done some quick tests:
We are working with 10 Python dictionaries here, ranging from 200KB to
600KB in size. The total size is about 4.2MB, and they contain about 4
A good tool would simply switch our existing data to HR without
changing the app id. Internally, you can copy the data, setup
aliasing, whatever... I don't mind :)
On Jul 6, 5:01 pm, Gregory D'alesandre gr...@google.com wrote:
We are working on better tools for migrating to HRD (and they are
- same thing). #2. New pricing for memcache that 'properly
reflects the cost of providing the service'?
johnP
On Jun 30, 1:48 am, Tim meer...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, June 30, 2011 7:06:03 AM UTC+1, Ikai L (Google) wrote:
The plan that is in place will be very close to what we launch
if this change
(dare I call it 'strategic error') imprints into the public mind as a
breach of trust, the impact will be very public, very deep, and very
lasting.
johnP
On Jun 30, 7:51 am, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
Tim -
+1 to your message overall.
You raised a fascinating point
entrepreneurial venture will fail because I cannot get a product out.
In this calculus, the advantage provided by Google Appengine (lowering
the cost of deploying a reliable, scalable application by eliminating
many categories of activity) win out for me.
johnP
On Jun 7, 11:10 pm, Brandon Wirtz
That's called a built-in profit margin.
On May 31, 12:51 am, Francois Masurel f.masu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everybody,
Does anyone knows why the second instance is still alive after serving only
2 requests in about 38 hours (cf. attachment) ?
It would cost me a lot in the new pricing
Wow. So many fundamental design assumptions are being turned on their
heads with the new incentive model!!!
It is unfortunate that Google failed to make the 100% granular cost
model work. The promise that made Appengine attractive was: You build
an app (adhering to our limitations). We will
in the scheduler. Would return the customer value
proposition to exactly Pay for what you use. And would bill the
same resource you are intending to bill. Maybe it's a semantic
difference, but one that would retain the attractiveness of
Appengine's original, amazing, revolutionary customer promise.
johnP
100% granular pricing is what made Appengine revolutionary.
On May 16, 1:49 am, Sylvain sylvain.viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
With the actual prices, a very small paid app that only need 1GB above
the free quota costs : $0.15 / month.
With the new prices : $9 (monthly fee) + $0.15 = $9.15.
is
free right now. But Google has broken trust with developers before.
Ballmer must be sharpening his tongue with witticism on the topic of,
Do no Evil
So please, be careful with this move.
johnP
On May 11, 10:57 am, Philip philip.mates...@driggle.com wrote:
Hi Greg,
suppose
Brandon -
I had the exact same thought at the exact same time.
On May 4, 10:10 am, Brandon Donnelson branflake2...@gmail.com wrote:
I got 40ms loading thishttp://demogwtcanvas.appspot.com/test.html
Brandon
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
+1 - despite the announcement that all's well, all's not well (yet).
johnP
On Mar 8, 6:46 am, Felippe Bueno felippe.bu...@gmail.com wrote:
Same here
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:30 AM, andreas schmid a.schmi...@gmail.comwrote:
its really not cool.
clients are getting angry
, is required for planning our resources and
development. In other words, instead of further optimizing by moving
further in a key_name_hash direction, we'd roll back a bunch of work,
perform the transition, then continue.
johnP
On Feb 1, 10:26 pm, Albert albertpa...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you!
On Feb 2
? If, for example, you have lots of data already;
and potentially other entanglements to an existing appspot domain -
are these customers relegated to slowly dissolve into obsolescence?
Or might there be a function available, in the future, to help with
the migration?
Thanks!
johnP
On Jan 31, 2:51 pm, Ikai Lan
Your model, 'Campaigns' has multiple reference properties that can
potentially reference User (either explicitly, or via a non-specific
reference property). Add a collection_name to such reference
properties (only one can remain without a collection_name).
On Feb 1, 5:00 am, Tim Hoffman
+1 on the deployments failing.
On Jan 12, 8:06 am, Ryan Goldstein r...@moberg.com wrote:
I've been updating and redeploying my app today (appid:
mobergdrmserver). It took progressively longer to deploy, and my most
recent attempt failed.
From my Eclipse console during my most recent
name is limited to 500 bytes long, so it may exceed if
you combine several keys into one.
--
keakon
My blog(Chinese):www.keakon.net
Blog source code:https://bitbucket.org/keakon/doodle/
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:43 PM, johnP j...@thinkwave.com wrote:
I need to create a large
I need to create a large amount of records which relate three other
entities. Just for example, take 100 people; 100 days; and 100
restaurants. To create a record for an intersection of a person/day/
restaurant, it's possible to create keyname of person.key()+day.key()
+restaurant.key(). And to
a request hits a warm instance)*.
Correct?
johnP
On Dec 2, 4:42 pm, Ikai Lan (Google) ikai.l+gro...@google.com
wrote:
No, this is specifically to address DeadlineExceededExceptions on cold
starts. Partial imports due to this exception on startup can cause apps to
end up in a bad state
Crash and burn?
Pretty much unaccessable now.
johnP
On Nov 23, 9:40 am, A. Stevko andy.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Lastly when something does execute, it is throwing catch
(java.lang.RuntimeException with null message.
Basically my site is DOWN!!!
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:36 AM
Amazing. I just pray that this is not temporary.
Thank you, and good job.
johnP
On Nov 6, 7:17 pm, PK p...@gae123.com wrote:
I noticed another great improvement: much faster app uploads. See my
comments in this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-python/browse_thread
Appengine has been horrible since the last maintenance. Periodic
waves of Request was aborted after waiting too long... and
DeadlineExceededErrors... Flurries of 25-100 of these in a 2-3 minute
period. Occurs on simple pages as well as db-intensive ones. I'm
using Django Appengine Patch.
It
instances of X running, and 0 instances of Y running,
over 30 minutes later).
And the usual existential question: Is this for everyone? Or is it
just me???
:)
johnP
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google App Engine group.
To post to this group, send
+1
On Oct 6, 8:56 am, Barry Hunter barrybhun...@gmail.com wrote:
+1.
Make it optional - default to on is ok. As long as it can be disabled.
On 6 October 2010 16:29, Rodrigo Moraes rodrigo.mor...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 6, 6:48 am, Greg wrote:
I guess one solution would be to make
We decide to schedule additional instances of your app based on its
user-facing latency.
This very material fact is not even mentioned in the article 'Best
practices for writing scalable applications'
http://code.google.com/appengine/articles/scaling/overview.html
johnP
On Sep 16, 9:03 am
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
