Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

open.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 152 posts

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#101

Post by teoruiz »

obulpathi wrote: post #76
vira28 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This thread here came at the right time. Today whole day I attended the DynamoDB training. Honestly, one thing that I understood is its cost based on reads and writes per second. Irrespective of the amount of read data per operation (whether its 1 bytes or 100 bytes), its always charged for 1KB. So, as a work around what they suggested is using a Kinesis, a Lambda and an another service to make the write operation as…

Yep, same problems with many other services: * Kinesis Streams: Writes limited to 1K/sec and 1 MB / shard, reads limited to 2K/shard. Want a different read/write ratio? Nop, not possible. Proposed solution: use more shards. Does not scale automatically. There is another service called Kinesis Streams that does not offer read access to streaming data. * EFS: Cold start problems. If you have small amount of data in EFS…

> * ECS: Two containers can not use same port on same node. Anti pattern to containers.

That's solved if you use Application Load Balancer instead of ELB classic for your ECS service.

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#105

Post by eicnix »

oblio wrote: post #95
obulpathi wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, same problems with many other services: * Kinesis Streams: Writes limited to 1K/sec and 1 MB / shard, reads limited to 2K/shard. Want a different read/write ratio? Nop, not possible. Proposed solution: use more shards. Does not scale automatically. There is another service called Kinesis Streams that does not offer read access to streaming data. * EFS: Cold start problems. If you have small amount of data in EFS…

> * ECS: Two containers can not use same port on same node. Anti pattern to containers. Could you elaborate for this? I'm not sure I understand, are you saying that 2 containers cannot be mapped to the same host port? Because that would seem normal, you can't bind to a port where there's already something listening. But I guess I must be missing something.

Nowaday you would often run containers with a container network(flannel, calico, etc.) that assigns an unique IP per container thus avoids conflicting port mappings regardless how many containers with the same port run on a single host.

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#107

Post by smn1234 »

neya wrote: post #85

Hey community, let me share my experience with AppEngine. I work in a small firm, where we've developed a massive Software Application comprising of 12 medium-sized apps. I went with Phoenix 1.3 w/ the new umbrella architecture. With AppEngine, the beauty is that you can have many custom named microservices under one AppEngine project and each microservices can have many versions. You can even decide how much percent…

The way you've delivered this "experience" makes you sound like you either work for Google or were asked to make a sponsored statement - for credits or $.

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#108

Post by bonesss »

vira28 wrote: post #82
obulpathi wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, same problems with many other services: * Kinesis Streams: Writes limited to 1K/sec and 1 MB / shard, reads limited to 2K/shard. Want a different read/write ratio? Nop, not possible. Proposed solution: use more shards. Does not scale automatically. There is another service called Kinesis Streams that does not offer read access to streaming data. * EFS: Cold start problems. If you have small amount of data in EFS…

Agree totally. The solution to overcome those shortcomings in AWS, is to sort of put bandaid's with more services (at least their suggestion). I do understand, its not feasible to provide service which fits for everyone, however it will be good if they solve the fundamental problem. One more to add in the list. In DynamoDB during peak (or rush hour) you can scale which increases the underlying replica's(or partitions…

You can scale DynamoDB down the same way you scale it up.

Perhaps you're thinking of some kind of autoscaling that only works in one direction?

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#109

Post by matt4077 »

Jedi72 wrote: post #25

Getting pro GCP articles to the top of HN must no-doubt be a high priority for the Google marketing team. This is the nature of modern advertising, sneakily trying to subvert your thinking by masquerading as something else.

That's the nature of conspiracy theories: sneakily insinuating a well-organised plot to harm, while masquerading as someone who thinks Occam's razor is a hairdresser.

PS: I don't work Google

Re: Moving The New York Times Games Platform to Google App Engine

#110

Post by kennethh »

iamgopal wrote: post #106
kennethh wrote: post #99

Anyone know how much it cost to add a custom domain and SSL to AppEngine(Standard og Flexible)? I have been looking and not able to find out how much it cost.

SSL is free. Custom domain also free.

That explains it, would be nice if they could write it down somewhere as a feature:)
Post reply on HN