Bumping Min-Pending latency should instruct the scheduler to wait for
existing instances to be available rather than spinning an additional
instance.

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Roch Delsalle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, Thanks for your explanations,
> What If I want my app to remain under a fixed amount of instances whatever
> spike happen ?
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Johan Euphrosine <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> You should be able to control the number of instances by using new
>> performance settings in "Application Settings > Performance":
>>
>> "Min Pending Latency" allows you to maximize existing instance usage
>> over new instance creation at the expense of potential increased
>> latency:
>> The scheduler will rather have the request waiting for at least "Min
>> Pending Latency" in the pending queue if no instance is available,
>> rather than starting a new instances for handling it.
>>
>> "Max Idle Instance" allows you to minimize the amount of Idle instance
>> the scheduler keeps around for handling traffic spikes, and enforce
>> that you don't get billed for more than "Number of Active Instances +
>> Max Idle Instances".
>> The scheduler will rather kill existing instance down to "Max Idle
>> Instance" rather than keeping them alive at the expense of an
>> increased amount of instance startup/shutdown cycle.
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Roch Delsalle <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I'm not leaving yet but I'll if the scheduler doesn't let me choose how
>> > many
>> > Instances I want.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Joshua Smith <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'm not leaving GAE, but in the comments on a RWW article, I saw that
>> >> the
>> >> AppScale folks ( http://appscale.cs.ucsb.edu/ ) seem to be trolling for
>> >> customers.  (I mean trolling in the fishing sense, no the usenet
>> >> sense.)
>> >> I'm sure those people must be on these mailing lists.  Perhaps one of
>> >> them
>> >> could speak up to how turn-key their solution is at this point?
>> >> I wonder if they've run any big apps like CDN-in-a-box on AWS, to see
>> >> how
>> >> the costs and performance compare.
>> >> On Sep 4, 2011, at 8:02 AM, Tim Hoffman wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Raymond
>> >> Unfortunately I don't see a lot of postings detailing what the real
>> >> alternatives to appengine are, what
>> >> certain size traffic sites and data sets would actually cost to run on
>> >> these alternatives.
>> >> May be you could provide a bit of an over view of your apps design,
>> >> what
>> >> its costing you,
>> >> how much it would cost to move elsewhere and run it on some other
>> >> platform
>> >> and what it would really cost to run
>> >> on that platform. What are the strengths and weaknesses of these other
>> >> platforms are, so that others in this community
>> >> can get some guidance.
>> >> Lots of people are throwing around statements like it is cheaper to run
>> >> on
>> >> heroku or AWS, but just not a lot of hard facts
>> >> at the moment.
>> >> A quick look at Heroku tells me a single dyno + 20GB shared DB will
>> >> cost
>> >> $15 per month, and 2 dynos + 20GB
>> >> shared DB is $50 per month.  Now I know nothing about Heroku but thats
>> >> what their pricing page is telling me.
>> >>  (Correct these figures if they are wrong)
>> >> Which all suggests to me that Heroku would cost about the same to host
>> >> a
>> >> small appengine app.
>> >> Rgds
>> >> Tim
>> >> --
>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> >> Groups
>> >> "Google App Engine" group.
>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/4uORTgZzKBUJ.
>> >> 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.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Johan Euphrosine (proppy)
>> Developer Programs Engineer
>> Google Developer Relations
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>



-- 
Johan Euphrosine (proppy)
Developer Programs Engineer
Google Developer Relations

-- 
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.

Reply via email to