You don't have a "memory Quota" if you don't store the variable containing the Fetch, you can got Fetch -> byte-string -> out
And it only costs incoming and outgoing bandwidth and "API CPU Time" I assume that if it streamed the numbers would be the same, only likely API CPU Time would be higher for the premium feature and the difference in QoS requirements. I'd bet if you spent $1000 a day on AppEngine they'd introduce the feature for you.. but I make 4 megabyte Fetches, write them to Mem-cache, and spit them out to the User often in under 300ms. I don't think I can "feel" the difference between this and Streaming. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joshua Bronson Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 10:08 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: RE: [google-appengine] Re: urlfetch - deadline clarification + two issues On Wednesday, April 13, 2011 12:59:12 PM UTC-4, Brandon Wirtz wrote: It's barely an issue if your source can take Google's Request. Fetch from Google often clocks at 400 Mbps. That's nice, but if streaming support were added, it would still be a better choice for my use case. Why have something count against my memory usage quota needlessly? :) -- 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.
