5 ms·

So if there's something always running .... isn't the same as having on always on server (with auto scaling of some sort)?

shishy 6y ago
Yes but still marginally easier to get it up and running
davidspiess 6y ago
It seems they want to replace their managed AppEngine service through Cloud Run in the long run.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  Cloud run is developed by the same team that built AppEngine. They share the same technical leadership and a lot of the technical stacks, for example, billing and security (gVisor). I dont think it's that simple to replace one service with another. It requires a lot of very sensitive dealing with external customers. And one cannot (easily) use the typical "Google deprecation" on a Cloud service offering, either. So it's complicated. But your impression is not too far from the inclination.
  - nojvek 6y ago
    I’d imagine google would at-least make both appEngine run on the same core primitives that cloud run uses. So while the public facing api is the same, the internals are replaced. At-least that’s how I’d approach it. Deprecate app-engine in that it will be infinitely supported until the last customer, but all new stuff is advocated to be used on cloud run.
- zadokshi 6y ago
  This definitely appears to be their trajectory. One would assume transition from AppEngine to Cloud Run would be directed by establishing a pricing differential that incentivises moving off AppEngine.
steren 6y ago
When a container is kept warm via " min-instances" but is not receiving requests ("idle"), its CPU costs 10x less than when it's actively processing requests, see pricing: https://cloud.google.com/run/pricing https://cloud.google.com/run/pricing
- YawningAngel 6y ago
  How is this cost saving achieved? At the risk of being reductive, surely the container is either in memory and ready to serve requests or it isn't?
  - lights0123 6y ago
    You still pay for RAM, just not CPU.
- giovannibonetti 6y ago
  Interesting, if an idle CPU costs 10x less, it ends up costing the same as 1 GB of memory, which amounts to about US$ 6/month each (Tier 1 pricing). For an app with low usage, you start getting a price that can compete with Heroku.
- jkaplowitz 6y ago
  I don't see the pricing for idle billable time disclosed on that site, only an indication that there is pricing. Am I missing it, or alternatively, could it be clarified?

shishy 6y ago

Yes but still marginally easier to get it up and running

davidspiess 6y ago

It seems they want to replace their managed AppEngine service through Cloud Run in the long run.

justicezyx 6y ago
Cloud run is developed by the same team that built AppEngine. They share the same technical leadership and a lot of the technical stacks, for example, billing and security (gVisor). I dont think it's that simple to replace one service with another. It requires a lot of very sensitive dealing with external customers. And one cannot (easily) use the typical "Google deprecation" on a Cloud service offering, either. So it's complicated. But your impression is not too far from the inclination.
- nojvek 6y ago
  I’d imagine google would at-least make both appEngine run on the same core primitives that cloud run uses. So while the public facing api is the same, the internals are replaced. At-least that’s how I’d approach it. Deprecate app-engine in that it will be infinitely supported until the last customer, but all new stuff is advocated to be used on cloud run.
zadokshi 6y ago
This definitely appears to be their trajectory. One would assume transition from AppEngine to Cloud Run would be directed by establishing a pricing differential that incentivises moving off AppEngine.

steren 6y ago

When a container is kept warm via " min-instances" but is not receiving requests ("idle"), its CPU costs 10x less than when it's actively processing requests, see pricing: https://cloud.google.com/run/pricing https://cloud.google.com/run/pricing

YawningAngel 6y ago
How is this cost saving achieved? At the risk of being reductive, surely the container is either in memory and ready to serve requests or it isn't?
- lights0123 6y ago
  You still pay for RAM, just not CPU.
giovannibonetti 6y ago
Interesting, if an idle CPU costs 10x less, it ends up costing the same as 1 GB of memory, which amounts to about US$ 6/month each (Tier 1 pricing). For an app with low usage, you start getting a price that can compete with Heroku.
jkaplowitz 6y ago
I don't see the pricing for idle billable time disclosed on that site, only an indication that there is pricing. Am I missing it, or alternatively, could it be clarified?