Keeping reserved instances has been added to our public roadmap: http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/roadmap.html
<http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/roadmap.html>As far as spinning up additional instances, there are probably a few good solutions here. We'll be best off collecting feedback when we ship reserved instances on which solution works best. On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:38 AM, gholler <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for your replies. I think we would want an option to pay to > keep at least one instance "warm" and ready to go at any time (I don't > know what makes sense for a fee though). > And as Guillermo says, that won't help us as new instances are needed > to scale. There could be a fee for paying accounts to get those > special startup requests, and I also don't know what makes sense for a > fee there. It would also need to be able to handle more than 30 > seconds, ideally it could be a task that keeps gettings called until > it returns a 200-299 status. The url for the task could be specified > in the appengine-web.xml. > > G > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google App Engine for Java" group. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<google-appengine-java%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en. > > -- Ikai Lan Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine http://googleappengine.blogspot.com | http://twitter.com/app_engine -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine for Java" 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-java?hl=en.
