On Sep 8, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Jon McAlister wrote: > I thought I did respond... In any event, for the reasons you listed > above and others, this is why max-idle-instances is important. It > ensures that you are not held accountable for scheduler behaviors such > as these listed. When you set it, the billable-instances-rate is > determined by max-idle-instances (a setting you directly control) and > active-instances-rate (again, hopefully something you control). The > nuances of how the scheduler spins up extra instances to minimize > latency and provide spare capacity are not part of the formula, other > than their effect on your serving latency and reliability.
Unless I'm misunderstanding, we are "held accountable for scheduler behaviors such as these listed." If the load could be served by a single instance, but the scheduler decides to start a second one to handle a single request (for no apparent reason), there is going to be a minimum of 0.25 instance hours added to my bill. If this happens once a day, and I need an instance up all the time to handle an external kiosk which refreshes itself, then I'm going to be charged for 24.25 - 24 (free) = 0.25 instance hours. If this happens X times a day, I'll be charged for 0.25X instance hours a day. And I have the billing prediction numbers to prove it: Obviously, this isn't that big a deal, since I've got to give you $9 a month anyway. But if the weird scheduler behaviors scale up, then this occasional propensity to start unneeded instances could really start costing someone some serious $$. -Joshua -- 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.
<<inline: PastedGraphic-9.png>>
<<inline: PastedGraphic-10.png>>
