I think if I let my costs rise by lowering the "max pending latency", kicking off new instances, that might cause a more gradual cost increase, than letting costs rise by increasing min idle instances. Based on the graph below, if a I set the min idle instances to 2, I'll have 2 instances running 24 hours, costing $1.92 a day, per instance (not considering free quota or pre-paid instance hours for the moment). But decreasing max pending latency might cost higher, but more proportional to heavy loads, than just a flat $1.92 extra every day. Comments?
[image: Requests/Second (24 hrs)] On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Rishi Arora <[email protected]>wrote: > I have an Android app that sends HTTP GET and POST requests to my app on > GAE. Why would this client occasionally get errors like "Connection to > https://shiprack-test1.appspot.com refused". Looks like a TCP level > connection refusal, and not an HTTP-level error. My app has a max idle > instances set to 1, and I have seen that the number of active instances is > usually always 5 or 6 during the day, peaking at ~15 every now and then. > At night, the number of active instances is 1, and occasionally 2. Is the > connection refusal a sign of extremely high latencies due to excessive > queueing? My min-pending latency is 10ms, and max is 2 seconds. Sounds > like if I reduce the max pending latency to a smaller value, I'll cause > more instances to get spawned in response to heavy load, but I might > address my connection refused problem? Am I thinking along the right track > here? > > Thanks in advance. > Rishi. > > -- 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.
