Many of us are equally frustrated with this problem. The relevant issue has already been moved to 'Accepted' status by Google, which I believe means that they have decided to address it. Of course, that doesn't give us an ETA, but I am hopeful that it will not be too long.
On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:10:20 AM UTC-4, Carl Schroeder wrote: > > They already have my app id and can look at the logs AFAIK. The issue > isn't whether it is or is not happening, the issue is convincing Google > that it should not be happening. I get the vibe that they think it is OK > for our users to wait 20 seconds for a page load that should take 800ms. > > Most else about app engine has been either good or great. All I need is a > button that I can press or checkbox I can check that will guarantee only > warmup requests go to cold instances. > > On Monday, October 22, 2012 11:08:46 PM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote: >> >> I'm not asking you to prove it to yourself or me, but to Google :) >> >> - Kris >> >> On Monday, October 22, 2012 3:17:44 PM UTC-7, Carl Schroeder wrote: >>> >>> It is actually pretty easy to prove when a request is going to a cold >>> instance vs a warmed up one. Simply output a log line from a place that is >>> only called during initialization of an instance. Make sure that the warmup >>> handler calls this part of the code, and that the code is only called once >>> per instance. I put mine in the abstraction layer that sits between >>> appengine, and my application code. >>> >>> My warmup handler shows this log message. So does any user facing >>> request that causes an instance of my app to be initialized. >>> >>> Also, I did a search for "This request caused a new process" in the log >>> files. Just today, 27 instance starts. My app can serve its user base off a >>> single instance with excellent response times. (If only I had a way to tell >>> the scheduler to piss off) >>> >>> For the past hour, I had 3 warmups handled and 4 user facing requests >>> routed to cold instances. I verified that the instances spun up by user >>> facing requests had different IDs than the ones spun up by warmup reqeusts. >>> I have an AWS instance that hits my site once every 60s to attempt to >>> insure that there is always a dynamic instance loaded. I have 1 resident >>> instance configured to "enable" warmups. >>> >>> >>> On Monday, October 22, 2012 2:55:19 PM UTC-7, Kristopher Giesing wrote: >>>> >>>> Can you post the relevant logs? Each request is stamped with the ID of >>>> the instance that served it. >>>> >>>> When I looked into my own logs I found that the request I thought was >>>> cold-served was actually going to a recently warmed instance, but that the >>>> warmup request didn't fully initialize everything so the first request >>>> after warmup was still too long. But it sounds like you have more and >>>> better data here to prove something is actually broken. >>>> >>>> - Kris >>>> >>>> On Monday, October 22, 2012 11:07:11 AM UTC-7, Carl Schroeder wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I just tested with my Application Settings configured to have 1 >>>>> Resident instance. >>>>> >>>>> With 1 resident, and 1 idle instance. I hit a page reload. 7 requests >>>>> were served by the instances according to the Instances pane in the App >>>>> Engine Console. The requests were handled in the following manner: >>>>> Zero went to the Resident instance. >>>>> 3 new instances were spun up. 2 with warmup requests, 1 with the first >>>>> user request given to a cold start. >>>>> 4 then went to the existing idle dynamic instance >>>>> 1 of the new instances handled 3 requests, the other 2 only handled >>>>> warmups. >>>>> >>>>> The VERY first request (the basic HTML of the page) went to a cold >>>>> instance. This happened despite the fact that there was an idle Resident >>>>> instance available AND an idle Dynamic instance available. The user >>>>> experience is staring at the browser for 20 seconds before anything >>>>> happens. That is unacceptable. >>>>> >>>>> Even with 4 dynamic instances, the scheduler is still spinning up new >>>>> ones with user facing requests. This is bizarre, pathological, >>>>> diabolical, >>>>> nonsensical behavior. I am running out of adjectives here. >>>>> >>>>> -- 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/-/fJPLlZhproYJ. 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.
