I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE users).
I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state the monthly price change as well.
I will be forced to leave app engine. I already spend thousands per
month, but that will increase to thousands per week. I'm seeing an
increase of 300%. Unless there is a change of policy I will be leaving
asap.
On Aug 31, 9:06 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com> wrote: > We are moving 22 servers away. > Already started the process to move to AWS. > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
> To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
> Hey guys, just some data collection: are you guys running Python?
> --
> Ikai Lan
> Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine
> plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We are moving 22 servers away.
> > Already started the process to move to AWS.
> > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
> > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
I'm thinking a lot of the biggest apparent price increases come from the fact that Python 2.5 instances are single threaded, whereas Python 2.7 with multiprocessing will serve more computing per instance. We're going to work with you to make this happen.
The billing email queues should be working now, so I want to encourage you especially to open a ticket via that email alias.
-- Ikai Lan Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Jason Collins <jason.a.coll...@gmail.com>wrote:
> We are going from $5,400/month to $26,500/month (Python) - and this is > only one of our apps.
> We are going to work hard to optimize our application because we > really like App Engine, but failing that, we may have to move > elsewhere.
> j
> On Aug 31, 7:17 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote: > > Hey guys, just some data collection: are you guys running Python?
> > -- > > Ikai Lan > > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > > plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > We are moving 22 servers away. > > > Already started the process to move to AWS. > > > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
> > > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com > . > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
<jason.a.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > We are going from $5,400/month to $26,500/month (Python) - and this is > only one of our apps.
> We are going to work hard to optimize our application because we > really like App Engine, but failing that, we may have to move > elsewhere.
> j
> On Aug 31, 7:17 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote: >> Hey guys, just some data collection: are you guys running Python?
>> -- >> Ikai Lan >> Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine >> plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > We are moving 22 servers away. >> > Already started the process to move to AWS. >> > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
>> > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >> > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
I submitted to appengine_updated_pric...@google.com - I hope that is
the one you meant.
Yes, instance-hours is a huge increase. However, we are also seeing
large cost increases on datastore writes. Are taskqueue.add() counted
under datastore writes? We're trying to figure out why the number is
so massively high for our app (300M+ ops/day?!).
j
On Aug 31, 7:44 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking a lot of the biggest apparent price increases come from the
> fact that Python 2.5 instances are single threaded, whereas Python 2.7 with
> multiprocessing will serve more computing per instance. We're going to work
> with you to make this happen.
> The billing email queues should be working now, so I want to encourage you
> especially to open a ticket via that email alias.
> --
> Ikai Lan
> Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine
> plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Jason Collins <jason.a.coll...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > We are going from $5,400/month to $26,500/month (Python) - and this is
> > only one of our apps.
> > We are going to work hard to optimize our application because we
> > really like App Engine, but failing that, we may have to move
> > elsewhere.
> > j
> > On Aug 31, 7:17 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote:
> > > Hey guys, just some data collection: are you guys running Python?
> > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > We are moving 22 servers away.
> > > > Already started the process to move to AWS.
> > > > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
> > > > --
> > > > 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/-/yvS-RalUAasJ.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com
> > .
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
I've already left GAE a couple of months ago. I.e. immediately after Greg replied to me that new pricing will come into effect before Python 2.7 and multithreading. My app has short bursts of thousands QPS, and without multithreading it was clear to me that for an unknown period I'd have to pay a very high price. Today's posts here prove that I was right.
Another reason was the insanely high price for instance hours - more than 10x the industry average. Sorry Google, but your servers are not made of gold. Paying that price is simply stupid, and I'm not stupid.
I've moved to a small VPS cluster at RackSpace Cloud. I rewrote my entire app as a Node.js application (previously was GAE/Python using Kay). Very happy so far, I don't think I'll ever return to GAE.
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Raymond C. <windz...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of > GAE users).
> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to > keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state > the monthly price change as well.
> And what options you are considering?
> -- > 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/-/MDdHgnCrDecJ. > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
I'll be leaving if some of the prices aren't tweaked, particularly the
channels. I was banking on being able to use a large amount of
channels, likely in the thousands per day. I did a double take when I
realized the new price was per hundred rather than per thousand,
particularly when channels expire after two hours and need to be re-
created. Does anyone have a good alternative to the Channel API using
Amazon's solutions?
-Richard
On Aug 31, 6:05 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE
> users).
> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to
> keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state
> the monthly price change as well.
Same here. Unless Python concurrency is so magical it cancels the
instance billing effect I'll have to move everything I can move away.
Or just turn it off because the indirect platform locking is rather
efficient.
I am not in the same league as those who pay thousands of dollars per
month but rather the average small developer who sees what was a 31 $
monthly bill jump to over 500 $.
I still don't understand why Google can't come up with a pricing that
is competitive with plain old linux hosting. I appreciate the
abstraction of the DataStore to save data but if getting rid of the
hassle of Linux admin means having the constant hassle of having to
optimize for the new GAE rules then maybe I should go back in time to
2000 and get a pair of good old servers.
Richard, a good alternative to the Channel API is Beacon Push (http://beaconpush.com/) we have been using it and it's dead simple and works flawlessly. It supports broadcast messaging (with channel API does not out of the box) as well as per-user messaging. Also extremely affordable, 3 million messages for $3.29.
-Martin
On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Richard Arrano wrote:
> I'll be leaving if some of the prices aren't tweaked, particularly the > channels. I was banking on being able to use a large amount of > channels, likely in the thousands per day. I did a double take when I > realized the new price was per hundred rather than per thousand, > particularly when channels expire after two hours and need to be re- > created. Does anyone have a good alternative to the Channel API using > Amazon's solutions?
> -Richard
> On Aug 31, 6:05 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE >> users).
>> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to >> keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state >> the monthly price change as well.
>> And what options you are considering?
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Thanks for sharing Beacon push. There are a couple of other such services as well. I evaluated them before opting for Channel API for Review19<http://www.review19.com> .
Reason being, the list of people to broadcast to is dynamic. For my app, there aren't fixed "rooms" or "groups" but the broadcast recipients changes frequently.
Channel API doesn't impose any rules, and forces you to persist client state on the server. This initially "feels" wrong but can be a blessing in disguise as you optimize the logic to decide the broadcast recipients.
I'm not saying Beacon Push and similar services are "bad". They just didn't work as well as Channel API for my use case.
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Martin Ceperley <mar...@ceperley.com> wrote: > Richard, a good alternative to the Channel API is Beacon Push ( > http://beaconpush.com/) we have been using it and it's dead simple and > works flawlessly. It supports broadcast messaging (with channel API does not > out of the box) as well as per-user messaging. Also extremely affordable, 3 > million messages for $3.29.
> -Martin
> On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Richard Arrano wrote:
> I'll be leaving if some of the prices aren't tweaked, particularly the > channels. I was banking on being able to use a large amount of > channels, likely in the thousands per day. I did a double take when I > realized the new price was per hundred rather than per thousand, > particularly when channels expire after two hours and need to be re- > created. Does anyone have a good alternative to the Channel API using > Amazon's solutions?
> -Richard
> On Aug 31, 6:05 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of > GAE
> users).
> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to
> keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) > state
> the monthly price change as well.
> And what options you are considering?
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine" group. > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Thanks Martin, that looks like a great alternative. Do you know
anything about Amazon's SNS? Is it applicable as a Channel replacement
or am I misunderstanding it? Either way, looks like a good way to
replace the now extremely expensive Channel API. Google appears to be
pricing themselves out of the cloud computing business. And I agree
with the views of a poster in another thread who mentioned that
working with App Engine and their changing models is like trying to
hit a moving target. Developers can't and won't spend all their time
reworking their applications to avoid incurring huge charges when
Google changes pricing around.
Thanks,
Richard
On Aug 31, 7:51 pm, Martin Ceperley <mar...@ceperley.com> wrote:
> Richard, a good alternative to the Channel API is Beacon Push (http://beaconpush.com/) we have been using it and it's dead simple and works flawlessly. It supports broadcast messaging (with channel API does not out of the box) as well as per-user messaging. Also extremely affordable, 3 million messages for $3.29.
> -Martin
> On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Richard Arrano wrote:
> > I'll be leaving if some of the prices aren't tweaked, particularly the
> > channels. I was banking on being able to use a large amount of
> > channels, likely in the thousands per day. I did a double take when I
> > realized the new price was per hundred rather than per thousand,
> > particularly when channels expire after two hours and need to be re-
> > created. Does anyone have a good alternative to the Channel API using
> > Amazon's solutions?
> > -Richard
> > On Aug 31, 6:05 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE
> >> users).
> >> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to
> >> keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state
> >> the monthly price change as well.
> >> And what options you are considering?
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
>> I did a double take when I realized the new price was per hundred >> rather than per thousand,particularly when >> channels expire after two hours and need to be re-created.
Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't this charge apply only after you exceed your free quota or 8000 odd created channels per day?
Could you share about the Database/Datastore experiences as well? What are the options on RackSpace Cloud and are they good/stable (went through the site but didnt see much info)? I am highly interested in node.js, its just the database options concern me.
I have been using PubNub. I skipped GAE Channels after knowing all the limitation, esp. its just for the browser. PubNub has everything I need, fast and being able to message to multiple users at once.
I dont know about Beacon Push, but with PubNub, everything could be dynamic, all "channels" are just a string which you can pre-calculate or dynamically allocate as you wish.
Richard, I haven't used Amazon SNS but from what I understand it not quite the same. Beacon Push is specifically for browser based real-time apps, using HTML5 WebSockets (and falling back on flash I believe) to push real-time JSON messages to connected users browsers. Amazon SNS seems to be more of a general backend service for powering cross platform notifications, not specifically for a browser as the client.
Like PubNub, channels in beacon push are just specified by a string and can be generated on the fly.
On Aug 31, 2011, at 11:00 PM, Richard Arrano wrote:
> Thanks Martin, that looks like a great alternative. Do you know > anything about Amazon's SNS? Is it applicable as a Channel replacement > or am I misunderstanding it? Either way, looks like a good way to > replace the now extremely expensive Channel API. Google appears to be > pricing themselves out of the cloud computing business. And I agree > with the views of a poster in another thread who mentioned that > working with App Engine and their changing models is like trying to > hit a moving target. Developers can't and won't spend all their time > reworking their applications to avoid incurring huge charges when > Google changes pricing around.
> Thanks, > Richard
> On Aug 31, 7:51 pm, Martin Ceperley <mar...@ceperley.com> wrote: >> Richard, a good alternative to the Channel API is Beacon Push (http://beaconpush.com/) we have been using it and it's dead simple and works flawlessly. It supports broadcast messaging (with channel API does not out of the box) as well as per-user messaging. Also extremely affordable, 3 million messages for $3.29.
>> -Martin
>> On Aug 31, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Richard Arrano wrote:
>>> I'll be leaving if some of the prices aren't tweaked, particularly the >>> channels. I was banking on being able to use a large amount of >>> channels, likely in the thousands per day. I did a double take when I >>> realized the new price was per hundred rather than per thousand, >>> particularly when channels expire after two hours and need to be re- >>> created. Does anyone have a good alternative to the Channel API using >>> Amazon's solutions?
>>> -Richard
>>> On Aug 31, 6:05 pm, "Raymond C." <windz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I am not asking who is not happy with the new pricing (virtually most of GAE >>>> users).
>>>> I am just asking who is FORCED to leave GAE because you cannot afford to >>>> keep running on GAE under the new pricing model. Please (if possible) state >>>> the monthly price change as well.
>>>> And what options you are considering?
>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group athttp://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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
Using the Java SDK. Our "Frontend Instance Hours" is where the lions share of change is coming from. Of the rest of the resources, only "Datastore Storage" will see a change (increase of 64% in cost)
I am a student. I love GAE because it provides enough free quota to try out new ideas and run your app for free until you start making significant amount of profit.
I have an XMPP based chat app. I need atleast 100,000 XMPP stanzas/day (just to run my app without making any significant profit) which according to new pricing scheme will cost me $3 per month but the minimum monthly is $9. Now I am left with no other option but to shut my app down.
As far as I can tell on the new billing page, it says 100 under "Free
Quota" for "Channels Created" and then a rate of $0.01 for every 100
more channels created. I could be misinterpreting it, but it seems
clear cut.
PubNub also looks like a great alternative to Channels, I'll have to
look at the two and weigh them. On a related note, if my application
is written for webapp and Django, does anyone know if it would be a
relatively simple task to set up Django/webapp on EC2 and transition
my code? Obviously I'd have to change the database to use SimpleDB,
but again, how arduous would this task be?
-Richard
On Aug 31, 8:05 pm, Srirangan <sriran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I did a double take when I realized the new price was per hundred
> >> rather than per thousand,particularly when
> >> channels expire after two hours and need to be re-created.
> Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't this charge apply only after you exceed
> your free quota or 8000 odd created channels per day?
I've not had time to play with Python 2.7 to see how much threads help yet, but the scheduler needs work too. I frequently see under 1 QPS / instance on low (sub 150ms) latency apps. I may be way of the mark, but it seems like just getting that fixed would be a significant reduction in cost for us, and a better utilization of resources for Google.
On Aug 31, 2011, at 20:44, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking a lot of the biggest apparent price increases come from the fact that Python 2.5 instances are single threaded, whereas Python 2.7 with multiprocessing will serve more computing per instance. We're going to work with you to make this happen.
> The billing email queues should be working now, so I want to encourage you especially to open a ticket via that email alias.
> -- > Ikai Lan > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:40 PM, Jason Collins <jason.a.coll...@gmail.com> wrote: > We are going from $5,400/month to $26,500/month (Python) - and this is > only one of our apps.
> We are going to work hard to optimize our application because we > really like App Engine, but failing that, we may have to move > elsewhere.
> j
> On Aug 31, 7:17 pm, "Ikai Lan (Google)" <ika...@google.com> wrote: > > Hey guys, just some data collection: are you guys running Python?
> > -- > > Ikai Lan > > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine > > plus.ikailan.com | twitter.com/ikai
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:14 PM, joakime <joakim.erdf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We are moving 22 servers away. > > > Already started the process to move to AWS. > > > Our costs went up 2800% under the new pricing.
> > > To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > 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 google-appengine@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
