That was my understanding, just wanted to verify. Thank you.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 01:13, Ikai Lan (Google) <[email protected]> wrote: > That should be the case, yes. If it's not, please let us know. The CPU ms > can be greater than 1000ms in aggregate since it includes parallelized calls > to the datastore. > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Robert Kluin <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hi Ikai, >> I think we all appreciate your response and clarification of this >> issue. Could you also clarify one more point for us, the "100ms" >> applies about the handler's actual response time and not the cpu_ms, >> is that correct? In other words it is the first "ms" number in my >> logs. >> >> The vast majority of my requests complete well under 800ms -- even >> some doing fairly "intensive" processing -- but the cpu_ms jumps all >> over the map (largely) depending on the cpu_api_ms. >> >> >> Thanks for the clarification. >> >> Robert >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 17:47, Ikai Lan (Google) >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Apologize, I wasn't clear. The 1000ms limit is only for user facing >> > requests. This does not apply to task queues or cron jobs. >> > >> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 9:44 PM, bFlood <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> does this count for the Task Queue as well? if so, how are we suppose >> >> to run tasks that span a couple of seconds? are you saying that if one >> >> task goes over 1000ms, you're not going to get any new instances? does >> >> this ban on new instances last for a certain time period? >> >> >> >> urlfetch - does one bad network hop (over 1000ms, for whatever reason) >> >> cause you not to scale as well (i'm guessing yes)? >> >> >> >> On Sep 15, 5:38 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > If it scaled linearly like that, we probably wouldn't have problems >> >> > with >> >> > long running requests. Unfortunately, long running requests are bad >> >> > for >> >> > the >> >> > ecosystem because they impose a non-linear cost. >> >> > >> >> > The number is officially 1000ms. We have been saying 800ms because we >> >> > allow >> >> > for some variance. If you tuned your requests to be 990ms and had a >> >> > period >> >> > of 10ms of latency, you'd be dead in the water. 800ms is a safe >> >> > enough >> >> > number that even if you experienced an additional spike of >> >> > 100ms-150ms >> >> > for >> >> > whatever reason (datastore slowness, unusual usage patterns in your >> >> > application causing Memcache misses, network latency via URLFetch), >> >> > you >> >> > can >> >> > tolerate it and be fairly confident you will be autoscaled. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Flips <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > @Harshal >> >> > > Actually slower requests mostly consume more cpu time and are much >> >> > > more expensive by default.. >> >> > >> >> > > On Sep 15, 8:28 pm, Harshal <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > I am OK with Google introducing tiered pricing for handle this >> >> > > > issue. >> >> > > Don't >> >> > > > take these numbers at their face values, but you would get the >> >> > > > point >> >> > > > I am >> >> > > > trying to make here. >> >> > >> >> > > > Avg. Requests CPU Charges >> >> > >> >> > > > < 700ms $0.02/hr >> >> > > > < 1500ms $0.04/hr >> >> > > > < 2000ms $0.06/hr >> >> > >> >> > > > For all the requests Google provision new servers but if you >> >> > > > requests >> >> > > take >> >> > > > longer you pay higher. Not sure if it really makes sense, but the >> >> > > > idea of >> >> > > > totally not allowing any scaling up is not good enough motivation >> >> > > > to >> >> > > write >> >> > > > ever more complex apps. >> >> > >> >> > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Jeff Schwartz >> >> > > > <[email protected] >> >> > > >wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > > > +1 and a whole lot more :( >> >> > >> >> > > > > While it is all our goals to produce efficient applications >> >> > > > > that >> >> > > > > can be >> >> > > > > scaled out, the platform itself has to be usable &, might I >> >> > > > > add, >> >> > > enforce >> >> > > > > ceilings that don't choke the life out of even the simplest of >> >> > > processes. In >> >> > > > > that regard I'd be willing to give up a little bit of >> >> > > > > scalability >> >> > > > > for >> >> > > > > somewhat more relaxed quotas. >> >> > >> >> > > > > But the real issue I believe is that of imposing unrealistic >> >> > > > > quotas. It >> >> > > is >> >> > > > > one thing to show an example of an efficient application built >> >> > > > > by >> >> > > Google and >> >> > > > > another to show how that relates to real world applications >> >> > > > > that >> >> > > > > though >> >> > > they >> >> > > > > employ all the same best practices still cannot function within >> >> > > > > the >> >> > > > > allowable quotas. >> >> > >> >> > > > > Resiliency is also a major issue on App Engine, if 99% of our >> >> > > > > code >> >> > > > > is >> >> > > > > protect the app from what can go wrong and that eats up our >> >> > > > > quota, >> >> > > > > what >> >> > > is >> >> > > > > left for doing real work? >> >> > >> >> > > > > It is my desire and I suppose that of many if not even most of >> >> > > > > the >> >> > > other >> >> > > > > developers that Google rethink their approach to providing >> >> > > > > scalability >> >> > > & >> >> > > > > resiliency to the masses on App Engine. >> >> > >> >> > > > > Jeff >> >> > >> >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Gordon <[email protected]> >> >> > > > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > > >> bothering, indeed.. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> On Sep 15, 6:11 pm, Robert Kluin <[email protected]> >> >> > > > >> wrote: >> >> > > > >> > I am starting to get concerned. A few months ago this >> >> > > > >> > number >> >> > > > >> > was >> >> > > > >> > 1000ms, right? Then about a month or two ago it became >> >> > > > >> > 850ms; >> >> > > > >> > actually I have even saw the 850 number posted within the >> >> > > > >> > last >> >> > > > >> > week. >> >> > > > >> > Now it is 700ms? >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > From my experience, getting or putting even a single entity >> >> > > > >> > can >> >> > > > >> > use >> >> > > a >> >> > > > >> > substantial portion of 700ms (20% to 40%). If you operate >> >> > > > >> > on >> >> > > multiple >> >> > > > >> > entities you'll easily use 1/2 of 700ms. Just the act of >> >> > > > >> > _running_ >> >> > > a >> >> > > > >> > query takes around 250ms -- when the datastore is actually >> >> > > functioning >> >> > > > >> > correctly. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > This trend is _really_ not good. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > Robert >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:18, bFlood <[email protected]> >> >> > > > >> > wrote: >> >> > > > >> > > not for nothing, but isn't "we may not schedule additional >> >> > > > >> > > servers >> >> > > for >> >> > > > >> > > your app" throttling? >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > > when did 700ms become a magic number? >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > > On Sep 15, 9:33 am, "Nick Johnson (Google)" < >> >> > > [email protected]> >> >> > > > >> > > wrote: >> >> > > > >> > >> Hi, >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> We don't throttle apps. If your average latency is over >> >> > > > >> > >> 700 >> >> > > > >> milliseconds for >> >> > > > >> > >> user-facing requests, we may not schedule additional >> >> > > > >> > >> servers >> >> > > > >> > >> for >> >> > > your >> >> > > > >> app, >> >> > > > >> > >> however. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> What leads you to conclude that your app is being >> >> > > > >> > >> throttled? >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> -Nick Johnson >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Coding Social < >> >> > > > >> [email protected]>wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > I have had appid mapthislink for many months now. >> >> > > > >> > >> > Recently my >> >> > > > >> > >> > extensions that use this web service to unwind urls >> >> > > > >> > >> > have >> >> > > > >> > >> > been >> >> > > > >> featured >> >> > > > >> > >> > by Google Chrome and Apple Safari so usage is up >> >> > > > >> > >> > substantially. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > Can someone turn off the throttle? Causing latency and >> >> > > > >> > >> > 13% >> >> > > error >> >> > > > >> > >> > rate. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > Thank you. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > -- >> >> > > > >> > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to >> >> > > > >> > >> > the >> >> > > Google >> >> > > > >> Groups >> >> > > > >> > >> > "Google App Engine" group. >> >> > > > >> > >> > To post to this group, send email to >> >> > > > >> [email protected]. >> >> > > > >> > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> > > > >> > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> > [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > > >> > >> > [email protected]><google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > [email protected]><google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > > >> [email protected]> >> >> > > > >> > >> > . >> >> > > > >> > >> > For more options, visit this group at >> >> > > > >> > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> -- >> >> > > > >> > >> Nick Johnson, Developer Programs Engineer, App Engine >> >> > > > >> > >> Google >> >> > > Ireland >> >> > > > >> Ltd. :: >> >> > > > >> > >> Registered in Dublin, Ireland, Registration Number: >> >> > > > >> > >> 368047 >> >> > > > >> > >> Google Ireland Ltd. :: Registered in Dublin, Ireland, >> >> > > Registration >> >> > > > >> Number: >> >> > > > >> > >> 368047 >> >> > >> >> > > > >> > > -- >> >> > > > >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to >> >> > > > >> > > the >> >> > > > >> > > Google >> >> > > > >> Groups "Google App Engine" group. >> >> > > > >> > > To post to this group, send email to >> >> > > > >> [email protected]. >> >> > > > >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > > >> [email protected]><google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > [email protected]> >> >> > > > >> . >> >> > > > >> > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// >> >> > > > >> groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> > >> >> > > > >> -- >> >> > > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >> >> > > > >> Google >> >> > > Groups >> >> > > > >> "Google App Engine" group. >> >> > > > >> To post to this group, send email to >> >> > > [email protected]. >> >> > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > > >> [email protected]><google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > [email protected]> >> >> > > > >> . >> >> > > > >> For more options, visit this group at >> >> > > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> > >> >> > > > > -- >> >> > > > > -- >> >> > > > > Jeff >> >> > >> >> > > > > -- >> >> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >> >> > > > > Google >> >> > > Groups >> >> > > > > "Google App Engine" group. >> >> > > > > To post to this group, send email to >> >> > > > > [email protected] >> >> > > . >> >> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > > > [email protected]><google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > [email protected]> >> >> > > > > . >> >> > > > > For more options, visit this group at >> >> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> > > Groups >> >> > > "Google App Engine" group. >> >> > > To post to this group, send email to >> >> > > [email protected]. >> >> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > [email protected]<google-appengine%2Bunsubscrib >> >> > > [email protected]> >> >> > > . >> >> > > For more options, visit this group at >> >> > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> Groups >> >> "Google App Engine" group. >> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> [email protected]. >> >> For more options, visit this group at >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups >> > "Google App Engine" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > [email protected]. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> > >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Google App Engine" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
