Rails - Oct 2009 - Google App Engine

Is anyone doing a project involving GAE?

Would love to hear of some existing projects!

My understanding is that Rails 3 Datamapper will be a much, much
better fit for Datastore?

Hi
   Dont know more bout this.But I was also watching

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHMpf6hx8Ek



Sijo
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 7:57 PM,
rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
<rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
> Is anyone doing a project involving GAE?
>
> Would love to hear of some existing projects!
>
> My understanding is that Rails 3 Datamapper will be a much, much
> better fit for Datastore?
>
>
>
In Rails 3.0, ActiveRecord is moving to a more database agnostic approach by
the use of ActiveModel.
Thus, one will be able to use any ORM or object store that supports the
ActiveModel API.  Now, in
regards to DataMapper and GAE, DataMapper is an ORM similar to ActiveRecord
but it interfaces with
a non-relational database called BigTable.  It''s a key value store and
indexes are automatically created
for you.  Furthermore, the notion of joins are not supported but optimistic
transactions are supported
within the BigTable.  Last but not least, GAE automatically scales your
application for you and the 5
million or so page views are free per month.  I would recommend playing with
the various technologies
and learning what works best for your project.

Good luck,

-Conrad

> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Thanks Conrad

Am very interested in using BigTable, since I think GAE is a platform
I''d like to commit to (automatic scaling is a huge plus for me)

Just trying to envisage what how a non-relational ActiveRecord will
bahave.... or whether the differences will be transparent.

On Oct 23, 3:15 pm, Sijo k g
<rails-mailing-l...-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHMpf6hx8Ek
Awesome :)

rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
wrote:
> Thanks Conrad
> 
> Am very interested in using BigTable, since I think GAE is a platform
> I''d like to commit to (automatic scaling is a huge plus for me)
I think it''s Headius (Charles Nutter) who has a blog post on how to get
Rails running on GAE.  Have you read his post?  Basically, although it 
is possible, it seems to me that GAE is not a great platform for Rails 
due to things like its hard 1000-file limit.

If you need automatic scaling for Rails, why not try Heroku?  That also 
gets you PostgreSQL instead of a non-relational DB.
> 
> Just trying to envisage what how a non-relational ActiveRecord will
> bahave.... or whether the differences will be transparent.
Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Heroku seems quite expensive... the $50 Crane recommended for small
business apps quickly becomes $158 when you follow their recommended
number of Dynos.  And there is no mention of bandwidth costs.
Meanwhile GAE is offering 5million page views free per month.

With BigTable.... I think there would be a considerable amount of re-
thinking needed to get Rails to use it effectively.

From what I''ve read, Google app engine wont necessarily scale well if
you blindly attempt to use it in a similar fashion as relational
databases


> GAE is not a great platform for Rails  due to things like its hard
1000-file limit
yeah I''m not sure about that limit.... if it''s relating to
project
files, that''s not so bad.... but I assume gernal website assets and
user content is in some way separate, or can be done through s3 etc

Hi ALL, you can find a really good comparison here:

http://rrees.wordpress.com/2009/10/08/heroku-versus-gae-gaej/

Good luck,

-Conrad

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 11:14 PM,
rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
<rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
> wrote:
>
> With BigTable.... I think there would be a considerable amount of re-
> thinking needed to get Rails to use it effectively.
>
> From what I''ve read, Google app engine wont necessarily scale well
if
> you blindly attempt to use it in a similar fashion as relational
> databases
>
>
>
> > GAE is not a great platform for Rails  due to things like its hard
> 1000-file limit
>
> yeah I''m not sure about that limit.... if it''s relating
to project
> files, that''s not so bad.... but I assume gernal website assets
and
> user content is in some way separate, or can be done through s3 etc
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
wrote:
> Heroku seems quite expensive... the $50 Crane recommended for small
> business apps quickly becomes $158 when you follow their recommended
> number of Dynos.  
You could start with one of their lower-end plans (like the free plan!) 
and see if it will work for you.  As far as I can tell, their rates are 
comparable to conventional hosts of similar power.
> And there is no mention of bandwidth costs.
I don''t think there are any additional bandwidth costs.  So far as I 
know, Heroku included unmetered bandwidth.
> Meanwhile GAE is offering 5million page views free per month.
So is Heroku -- if your app will do that on the free plan. :)

Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
wrote:
> With BigTable.... I think there would be a considerable amount of re-
> thinking needed to get Rails to use it effectively.
> 
> From what I''ve read, Google app engine wont necessarily scale well
if
> you blindly attempt to use it in a similar fashion as relational
> databases
> 
> 
> 
>> GAE is not a great platform for Rails  due to things like its hard
1000-file limit
> 
> yeah I''m not sure about that limit.... if it''s relating
to project
> files, that''s not so bad...
Yes it is.  Remember that you need to put Rails in your vendor directory 
to host it on GAE.  That''s 1556 files right there (for 2.3.4), and 
you''re over the limit without any actual app code.  Headius was only 
able to get Rails on GAE by removing framework files.
> but I assume gernal website assets and
> user content is in some way separate, or can be done through s3 etc
Presumably.

Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <
rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> rails.nerd-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org wrote:
> > With BigTable.... I think there would be a considerable amount of re-
> > thinking needed to get Rails to use it effectively.
> >
> > From what I''ve read, Google app engine wont necessarily scale
well if
> > you blindly attempt to use it in a similar fashion as relational
> > databases
> >
> >
> >
> >> GAE is not a great platform for Rails  due to things like its hard
> 1000-file limit
> >
> > yeah I''m not sure about that limit.... if it''s
relating to project
> > files, that''s not so bad...
>
> Yes it is.  Remember that you need to put Rails in your vendor directory
> to host it on GAE.  That''s 1556 files right there (for 2.3.4), and
> you''re over the limit without any actual app code.  Headius was
only
> able to get Rails on GAE by removing framework files.
>
>
You can actually package all your gems including rails into a single jar
file to work around this issue.  Also, Google has provided tools to simply
do just that.

-Conrad

> > but I assume gernal website assets and
> > user content is in some way separate, or can be done through s3 etc
>
> Presumably.
>
> Best,
> --
> Marnen Laibow-Koser
> http://www.marnen.org
> marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Conrad Taylor wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <
> rails-mailing-list-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> 
>> >
>>
>>
> You can actually package all your gems including rails into a single jar
> file to work around this issue.  
Will that actually work, or does GAE unzip the JAR before counting 
files?
> Also, Google has provided tools to 
> simply
> do just that.
I''ll look at that.  Got a link handy?
> 
> -Conrad
Best,
--
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Oct 25, 8:05 am, Marnen Laibow-Koser <rails-mailing-l...@andreas-
s.net> wrote:
> Conrad Taylor wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser <
> > rails-mailing-l...-ARtvInVfO7ksV2N9l4h3zg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > You can actually package all your gems including rails into a single
jar
> > file to work around this issue.  
>
> Will that actually work, or does GAE unzip the JAR before counting
> files?
>
Yes, this does actually work because all gems get installed into the
servlet container as gems.jar.
Thus, everytime you install a gem it gets inserted into gems.jar using
the following command:

appcfg.rb gem install [ <gem-name> ]+   // install one of more gems
into the servlet container

For example, appcfg.rb gem install rails dm-appengine rails_datamapper

Next, all .rb files gets transformed into .class files to actually run
on the servlet container.  Last
but not least, there are about 3 other jar files which are required by
GAE and you''ll be using 4 jar
files total which are not unzipped by GAE.
> > Also,Googlehas provided tools to
> > simply
> > do just that.
>
> I''ll look at that.  Got a link handy?
>
>
http://rails-primer.appspot.com
>
> > -Conrad
>
> Best,
> --
> Marnen Laibow-Koserhttp://www.marnen.org
> mar...-sbuyVjPbboAdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.