The pay-as-you-go won't be enabled until sometime around the end of
the year.
The quoted CPU pricing "$0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour" is similar to
Amazon EC2 small instance pricing ($0.10/hr), but it's probably not a
straight comparison. AppEngine seems to charge by the sip, as might
be expected from a compute utility, while web apps will probably
require a minimum of 24x7 usage of an EC2 instance. So AppEngine
should be less costly on the low-end.
Here's an interview with some AppEngine managers on the announcements
tomorrow:
> The pay-as-you-go won't be enabled until sometime around the end of
> the year.
> The quoted CPU pricing "$0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour" is similar to
> Amazon EC2 small instance pricing ($0.10/hr), but it's probably not a
> straight comparison. AppEngine seems to charge by the sip, as might
> be expected from a compute utility, while web apps will probably
> require a minimum of 24x7 usage of an EC2 instance. So AppEngine
> should be less costly on the low-end.
> Here's an interview with some AppEngine managers on the announcements
> tomorrow:
I am confused!
The throttled basic account will remain free, right?
So this will stand:
"It's free to get started.
Every Google App Engine application can use up to 500MB of persistent
storage and enough bandwidth and CPU for 5 million monthly page
views."
> The pay-as-you-go won't be enabled until sometime around the end of
> the year.
> The quoted CPU pricing "$0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour" is similar to
> Amazon EC2 small instance pricing ($0.10/hr), but it's probably not a
> straight comparison. AppEngine seems to charge by the sip, as might
> be expected from a compute utility, while web apps will probably
> require a minimum of 24x7 usage of an EC2 instance. So AppEngine
> should be less costly on the low-end.
> Here's an interview with some AppEngine managers on the announcements
> tomorrow:
But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through Picasa ?
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> wow,it's a good news.
> On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
As I read on http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-... , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for GET/
POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX
applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly
returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be
really cheap to me..
Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this
to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
Keep on coding,
Manuel
On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, manschmidt <google...@tliff.com> wrote:
> As I read on > http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-... > , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for GET/ > POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX > applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly > returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be > really cheap to me..
> Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this > to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
> Keep on coding, > Manuel
> On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote: > > I agree,
> > But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through Picasa ?
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > wow,it's a good news.
> > > On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour > > > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage > > > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth > > > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
> > -- > > Thanks & Best Regards,
> > Feris > > PT. Putera Handal Indotama > > A Business Intelligence Company > > Jl. K.H. Moh Mansyur No. 11 B 8 - 12 > > Jakarta - Indonesia > > Phone : +6221-30119353 > > Fax : +6221-5513483 > > Mobile : +628176-474-525http:/ > /business-intelligence.phi-integration.comhttp://blog.komputasiawan.com
> I assume "$0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage" means we get physical file
> storage then?
> Will this mean we get any programmatic way to store aswell? Or will we still
> have no file write access?
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, manschmidt <google...@tliff.com> wrote:
> > As I read on
> >http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-...
> > , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for GET/
> > POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX
> > applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly
> > returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be
> > really cheap to me..
> > Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this
> > to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
> > Keep on coding,
> > Manuel
> > On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote:
> > > I agree,
> > > But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through Picasa ?
> > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > wow,it's a good news.
> > > > On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour
> > > > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage
> > > > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth
> > > > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
> > > --
> > > Thanks & Best Regards,
> > > Feris
> > > PT. Putera Handal Indotama
> > > A Business Intelligence Company
> > > Jl. K.H. Moh Mansyur No. 11 B 8 - 12
> > > Jakarta - Indonesia
> > > Phone : +6221-30119353
> > > Fax : +6221-5513483
> > > Mobile : +628176-474-525http:/
> > /business-intelligence.phi-integration.comhttp://blog.komputasiawan.com
> This refers to your datastore, I believe. You already have the
> ability to store files, with the data store. Big table, remember?
> On May 28, 9:58 am, "Lee O" <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I assume "$0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage" means we get physical file
> > storage then?
> > Will this mean we get any programmatic way to store aswell? Or will we still
> > have no file write access?
> > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, manschmidt <google...@tliff.com> wrote:
> > > As I read on
> > >http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-...
> > > , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for GET/
> > > POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX
> > > applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly
> > > returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be
> > > really cheap to me..
> > > Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this
> > > to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
> > > Keep on coding,
> > > Manuel
> > > On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote:
> > > > I agree,
> > > > But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through Picasa ?
> > > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > wow,it's a good news.
> > > > > On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour
> > > > > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage
> > > > > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth
> > > > > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks & Best Regards,
> > > > Feris
> > > > PT. Putera Handal Indotama
> > > > A Business Intelligence Company
> > > > Jl. K.H. Moh Mansyur No. 11 B 8 - 12
> > > > Jakarta - Indonesia
> > > > Phone : +6221-30119353
> > > > Fax : +6221-5513483
> > > > Mobile : +628176-474-525http:/
> > > /business-intelligence.phi-integration.comhttp://blog.komputasiawan.com
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Anthony <acorc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What about request times / urlfetch limits - have these been > increased?
> Does this mean we can store large files, videos etc in the datastore > or do we still need S3?
> On May 28, 6:39 pm, ctran <ct...@pragmaquest.com> wrote: > > This refers to your datastore, I believe. You already have the > > ability to store files, with the data store. Big table, remember?
> > On May 28, 9:58 am, "Lee O" <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I assume "$0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage" means we get physical > file > > > storage then?
> > > Will this mean we get any programmatic way to store aswell? Or will we > still > > > have no file write access?
> > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, manschmidt <google...@tliff.com> > wrote:
> > > > As I read on
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-... > > > > , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for > GET/ > > > > POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX > > > > applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly > > > > returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be > > > > really cheap to me..
> > > > Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this > > > > to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
> > > > Keep on coding, > > > > Manuel
> > > > On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote: > > > > > I agree,
> > > > > But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through > Picasa ?
> > > > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> > > > > > wow,it's a good news.
> > > > > > On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour > > > > > > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage > > > > > > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth > > > > > > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
> > > > > -- > > > > > Thanks & Best Regards,
> > > > > Feris > > > > > PT. Putera Handal Indotama > > > > > A Business Intelligence Company > > > > > Jl. K.H. Moh Mansyur No. 11 B 8 - 12 > > > > > Jakarta - Indonesia > > > > > Phone : +6221-30119353 > > > > > Fax : +6221-5513483 > > > > > Mobile : +628176-474-525http:/ > > > > /business-intelligence.phi-integration.comhttp:// > blog.komputasiawan.com
The way I understand it, there are no immediate plans to turn the
Google App Engine in a file server. The idea is that you should use
BigTable. However, Google did mention in the keynote that they plan to
increase the size of the upload/downloads, that they you could
actually upload larger data blobs.
Filip.
On 28 mei, 19:59, "Lee O" <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yea at the moment the datastore stinks for file storage. Wonder what will be
> done on this front.
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Anthony <acorc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What about request times / urlfetch limits - have these been
> > increased?
> > Does this mean we can store large files, videos etc in the datastore
> > or do we still need S3?
> > On May 28, 6:39 pm, ctran <ct...@pragmaquest.com> wrote:
> > > This refers to your datastore, I believe. You already have the
> > > ability to store files, with the data store. Big table, remember?
> > > On May 28, 9:58 am, "Lee O" <lee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I assume "$0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage" means we get physical
> > file
> > > > storage then?
> > > > Will this mean we get any programmatic way to store aswell? Or will we
> > still
> > > > have no file write access?
> > > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, manschmidt <google...@tliff.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > As I read on
> >http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Google-erweitert-Anwendungsdienst-App-...
> > > > > , the best thing in my eyes is that there seems to be no fees for
> > GET/
> > > > > POST-Requests, which is opening the door to cluster-hosted AJAX
> > > > > applications. If I remember that all my AJAX-Applications are mainly
> > > > > returning a only 5-10 digits long string (+ header), this will be
> > > > > really cheap to me..
> > > > > Hopefully they are guaranting Aviability to us so we can perform this
> > > > > to our customers aswell in our SLA's.
> > > > > Keep on coding,
> > > > > Manuel
> > > > > On 28 Mai, 13:55, "Feris Thia" <fe...@phi-integration.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I agree,
> > > > > > But is manipulating and storing image still have to get through
> > Picasa ?
> > > > > > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:37 AM, fpc0000 <fpc0...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > wow,it's a good news.
> > > > > > > On May 28, 8:11 am, Bill <billk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > $0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour
> > > > > > > > $0.15 - $0.18 per GB-month of storage
> > > > > > > > $0.11 - $0.13 per GB outgoing bandwidth
> > > > > > > > $0.09 - $0.11 per GB incoming bandwidth
> I am confused!
> The throttled basic account will remain free, right?
> So this will stand:
> "It's free to get started.
> Every Google App Engine application can use up to 500MB of persistent
> storage and enough bandwidth and CPU for 5 million monthly page
> views."
On May 28, 10:00 pm, Filip <filip.verhae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, prices are to get more than the basic quota.
For overages or for quota+overage? Per resource, or across the board?
How fast is their platonic CPU-core? (What is the conversion to
megacycles?)
I am most concerned about going over the 1000-blob/500mb limit — if I
do will I have to pay for all my usage of the other resources, or they
quota-ed independently? Storage is not transient like the other
resources :)
Well, I don't speak for the Google App Engine team. Based on what I
heard today at Google I/O, I'd guess
> For overages or for quota+overage? Per resource, or across the board?
Per overage per resource I guess. Seems unfair otherwise.
> How fast is their platonic CPU-core? (What is the conversion to megacycles?)
Can't answer that one.
> I am most concerned about going over the 1000-blob/500mb limit — if I
> do will I have to pay for all my usage of the other resources, or they
> quota-ed independently? Storage is not transient like the other
> resources :)
Actually, the 1000-blob limit does not exist. That's a typo in the
docs. There is a 1000 file limit though. Their plans on that
particular limit I don't know. I don't anticipate to run into that
file limit anytime soon myself.
On the 500 MB limit, yes you'll have to pay for all storage above 500
MB (or whatever the final limit is they decide upon). Sure, it isn't
transient to you, but neither is it to them. You are free to delete
data, something they can't do. This is essentially identical pricing
concept to what Amazon uses. And it seems the only approach that makes
commercial sense to me.
On May 28, 10:00 pm, Filip <filip.verhae...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, prices are to get more than the basic quota. But although the
> prices have been announced, I was told that extra quota cannot be
> bought just yet.
I made up a short summary document comparing the two services GAE vs.
EC2. If you have any thoughts on this, I'll update the doc with your
comments. Cheers.
> The pay-as-you-go won't be enabled until sometime around the end of
> the year.
> The quoted CPU pricing "$0.10 - $0.12 per CPU core-hour" is similar to
> Amazon EC2 small instance pricing ($0.10/hr), but it's probably not a
> straight comparison. AppEngine seems to charge by the sip, as might
> be expected from a compute utility, while web apps will probably
> require a minimum of 24x7 usage of an EC2 instance. So AppEngine
> should be less costly on the low-end.
> Here's an interview with some AppEngine managers on the announcements
> tomorrow:
|
