Glad to hear it. As I'm sure the webob maintainers will be also. :)

I was unaware there was a freeze myself. 

On Monday, February 27, 2012 9:32:35 PM UTC-5, Anand Mistry wrote:
>
> We're starting to put more love into the dev_appserver, eventually fixing 
> some of these issues. Also, we've had a self-imposed freeze on third-party 
> library versions for the past couple of months. Now that we're GA, we can 
> lift that freeze and start adding newer library versions. We're already 
> adding webapp 2.5.1 and django 1.3 in 1.6.3.
>
> On Tuesday, 28 February 2012 12:08:25 UTC+11, Tom Willis wrote:
>>
>> A recent version of webob in the sdk would be nice. :)
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/detail?id=6507
>>
>> On Monday, February 27, 2012 6:05:40 PM UTC-5, Cayden Meyer wrote:
>>>
>>> The App Engine team have made many recent changes which have fixed bugs 
>>> and improved performance. We will continue to make improvements and add new 
>>> libraries as time goes on. 
>>>
>>> We have seen many applications which have seen significant reductions in 
>>> the number of instances when using concurrent requests, however concurrent 
>>> requests will offer the greatest reduction in instance usage when 
>>> applications are not CPU bound. 
>>>
>>> I encourage you to try Python 2.7 with your own applications and look 
>>> forward to hearing your questions, comments and suggestions for new 
>>> libraries <http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/list>. 
>>>
>>> Cayden Meyer
>>> Product Manager, Google App Engine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 February 2012 06:20, Brandon Wirtz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’m on 2.7 it made a huge difference. Likely if your app is Data Store 
>>>> Heavy you will see Massive improvements. If you are computation heavy you 
>>>> will not.
>>>>
>>>> Look at your dashboard the CPU Seconds Use/Second will tell you the 
>>>> ratio of Instance CPU Cycles to API CPU cycles. On 2.5  I ran at 1/10 the 
>>>> CPU as the API. On 2.7 I’m at closer to 1/3   
>>>>
>>>> That didn’t equate to 1/3 fewer instances but it did equate to half as 
>>>> many.
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> 2.7 seems to be hit harder by the random “everything is taking 3 times 
>>>> as long” bug.  And 2.7 instance spin up seems to be a bit slower than 2.5 
>>>> instances.
>>>> Also because you can have more than one request per instance you have 
>>>> to be more aware of your memory usage because if you have an app that uses 
>>>> 50 megs of memory and it is serving 3 requests, you will see your instance 
>>>> killed more often for hitting the soft memory limit.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Joshua Smith
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 27, 2012 11:57 AM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* [google-appengine] Py2.7****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In today's blog:****
>>>>
>>>> * *
>>>>
>>>> *We think the Python 2.7 runtime for App Engine is a great step 
>>>> forward for our developers.  First, it allows applications to take 
>>>> advantage of **concurrent 
>>>> requests*<http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/python27/newin27.html#Concurrent_Requests>
>>>> *, allowing you to build more performant and efficient applications. 
>>>> If your application wasn't fully utilizing the CPU, chances are that 
>>>> you'll 
>>>> be able to use concurrent requests to reduce the total number of instances 
>>>> and serve more with less.*****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't at all gibe with the stats people have been posting.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> From what I've read on these lists, 2.7 is slow at RPCs. But RPCs are 
>>>> the main way to not fully utilize the CPU. So for most apps, what you gain 
>>>> in concurrency, you lose in performance per thread.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Is google announcing some performance breakthrough, or is this just 
>>>> reality-distortion-field stuff?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> -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.****
>>>>  
>>>> -- 
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>>  
>> On Monday, February 27, 2012 6:05:40 PM UTC-5, Cayden Meyer wrote:
>>>
>>> The App Engine team have made many recent changes which have fixed bugs 
>>> and improved performance. We will continue to make improvements and add new 
>>> libraries as time goes on. 
>>>
>>> We have seen many applications which have seen significant reductions in 
>>> the number of instances when using concurrent requests, however concurrent 
>>> requests will offer the greatest reduction in instance usage when 
>>> applications are not CPU bound. 
>>>
>>> I encourage you to try Python 2.7 with your own applications and look 
>>> forward to hearing your questions, comments and suggestions for new 
>>> libraries <http://code.google.com/p/googleappengine/issues/list>. 
>>>
>>> Cayden Meyer
>>> Product Manager, Google App Engine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 February 2012 06:20, Brandon Wirtz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’m on 2.7 it made a huge difference. Likely if your app is Data Store 
>>>> Heavy you will see Massive improvements. If you are computation heavy you 
>>>> will not.
>>>>
>>>> Look at your dashboard the CPU Seconds Use/Second will tell you the 
>>>> ratio of Instance CPU Cycles to API CPU cycles. On 2.5  I ran at 1/10 the 
>>>> CPU as the API. On 2.7 I’m at closer to 1/3   
>>>>
>>>> That didn’t equate to 1/3 fewer instances but it did equate to half as 
>>>> many.
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> 2.7 seems to be hit harder by the random “everything is taking 3 times 
>>>> as long” bug.  And 2.7 instance spin up seems to be a bit slower than 2.5 
>>>> instances.
>>>> Also because you can have more than one request per instance you have 
>>>> to be more aware of your memory usage because if you have an app that uses 
>>>> 50 megs of memory and it is serving 3 requests, you will see your instance 
>>>> killed more often for hitting the soft memory limit.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Joshua Smith
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, February 27, 2012 11:57 AM
>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>> *Subject:* [google-appengine] Py2.7****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In today's blog:****
>>>>
>>>> * *
>>>>
>>>> *We think the Python 2.7 runtime for App Engine is a great step 
>>>> forward for our developers.  First, it allows applications to take 
>>>> advantage of **concurrent 
>>>> requests*<http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/python27/newin27.html#Concurrent_Requests>
>>>> *, allowing you to build more performant and efficient applications. 
>>>> If your application wasn't fully utilizing the CPU, chances are that 
>>>> you'll 
>>>> be able to use concurrent requests to reduce the total number of instances 
>>>> and serve more with less.*****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't at all gibe with the stats people have been posting.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> From what I've read on these lists, 2.7 is slow at RPCs. But RPCs are 
>>>> the main way to not fully utilize the CPU. So for most apps, what you gain 
>>>> in concurrency, you lose in performance per thread.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Is google announcing some performance breakthrough, or is this just 
>>>> reality-distortion-field stuff?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> -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.****
>>>>  
>>>> -- 
>>>> 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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-appengine/-/rGkqsb_2VZEJ.
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