Assigned
Status Update
No update yet.
Comments
ge...@gmail.com
Thanks for the report!
Unfortunately you can't specify a height or width for video files at the moment, and the 'dv' parameter returns a downsampled version of the video. There is currently no option to retrieve the video in its original resolution.
I have forwarded this to the team and will update here once I hear back.
Unfortunately you can't specify a height or width for video files at the moment, and the 'dv' parameter returns a downsampled version of the video. There is currently no option to retrieve the video in its original resolution.
I have forwarded this to the team and will update here once I hear back.
we...@google.com
se...@gmail.com
Is there a separate ticket for adding the ability to download full resolution video? Or does this documentation ticket also cover that? I want to make sure I'm tracking the correct ticket so I'll know when that feature is added.
we...@google.com
Re #5, we can track this here. I have renamed the title of the issue to capture this.
to...@gmail.com
Not sure if this works (or is fool-proof), but I tried reverse-engineering this based on the URLs I see in Google Photos directly, and in Picasa. My hunch is, if you pass the attribute "=m37", you might get a higher resolution video. How I tracked this down is:
1. Go to Picasa's API for showing your albums:https://picasaweb.google.com/data/feed/api/user/YOUR_USER_ID_HERE?kind=album&prettyprint=true . Find the album you are looking for, in the element <gphoto:id>xxxxx</gphoto:id>. Note that this album id is different from your Google Photos album id.
2. Now look at your album via Picasa's API:https://picasaweb.google.com/data/feed/api/user/YOUR_USER_ID/albumid/YOUR_ALBUM_ID?kind=photo&prettyprint=true . Find the video you are looking for (you can search by title etc.).You will see the following defined:
<media:content url='https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/dummy-image-url=m18 ' height='360' width='640' type='video/mpeg4' medium='video'/>
<media:content url='https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/dummy-image-url=m22 ' height='720' width='1280' type='video/mpeg4' medium='video'/>
<media:content url='https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/dummy-image-url=m37 ' height='1080' width='1920' type='video/mpeg4' medium='video'/>
Specifically look for those items where the type='video/mpeg4'.
If you observe the URLs you will see that they have the same URL with a different suffix: =m18 for the smallest resolution, =m22 for the medium resolution, and =m37 for the highest resolution. This is what I see in my albums; you might see something else. What I have found, though, is that if I simply append "=m37" to the URL shown in Google Photos API, it seems to neatly bring me a good resolution video.
Product Team,
Is my hypothesis correct? Or am I completely off-base?
1. Go to Picasa's API for showing your albums:
2. Now look at your album via Picasa's API:
<media:content url='
<media:content url='
<media:content url='
Specifically look for those items where the type='video/mpeg4'.
If you observe the URLs you will see that they have the same URL with a different suffix: =m18 for the smallest resolution, =m22 for the medium resolution, and =m37 for the highest resolution. This is what I see in my albums; you might see something else. What I have found, though, is that if I simply append "=m37" to the URL shown in Google Photos API, it seems to neatly bring me a good resolution video.
Product Team,
Is my hypothesis correct? Or am I completely off-base?
se...@gmail.com
One more thing - I got the idea of looking at the Picasa API because in the preview page of Google Photos I saw that the small preview of my video was suffixed with "=m18", and I had seen that while I was working with the Picasa API.
wo...@gmail.com
Re #8 Adding "=m37" works for me in a browser but gives me a 404 when calling the API.
Furthermore, requesting 'https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/[video-baseUrl]=dv ' now results in an Error 400 (did work before for low-res videos) - do I just leave that here, or do I open another issue?
Furthermore, requesting '
an...@gmail.com
Please do not use any flags that are not documented on the "Access media items" guide in our developer documentation: https://developers.google.com/photos/library/guides/access-media-items
Undocumented flags are not supported and should not be used directly. If you have a use case for other types of encoded or processed video, please do file a new feature request, describing your use and any technical requirements.
Undocumented flags are not supported and should not be used directly. If you have a use case for other types of encoded or processed video, please do file a new feature request, describing your use and any technical requirements.
pe...@gmail.com
How is this a feature request, this is clearly a bug. The dv link should download the full resolution just like the documentation states and also its a minimum functionality of getting a media item. Currently there is no way to download the video so the feature is broken. Please update the bug type and priority.
pk...@gmail.com
Correction (I shouldn't say just resolution but rather full quality of the video):
Based on the description in the documentation the dv parameter should download the full quality video. There is no mention of down sampling the in documentation.
In addition it the basic expectation of getting a media item is to have access to its full quality download.Not having this ability makes the api incomplete missing basic functionality most apps require.
Finally access to full quality video would be consistent with the way images download works (full quality with some tagging stripped).
This is why I think this is a bug, the behavior is unexpected, undocumented, and inconsistent with other interfaces.
Thanks!
Based on the description in the documentation the dv parameter should download the full quality video. There is no mention of down sampling the in documentation.
In addition it the basic expectation of getting a media item is to have access to its full quality download.Not having this ability makes the api incomplete missing basic functionality most apps require.
Finally access to full quality video would be consistent with the way images download works (full quality with some tagging stripped).
This is why I think this is a bug, the behavior is unexpected, undocumented, and inconsistent with other interfaces.
Thanks!
an...@gmail.com
Any update on this? There's little point in me using the API if I can't download the original (or thereabouts) video. It can't be that hard to implement.
ro...@gmail.com
It's blocked by 109754198 but I don't have permission to view that.
to...@gmail.com
We have made some changes recently to the way data is returned from base URLs for videos.
Can you confirm if the quality and resolution is of higher quality now?
If you are still seeing this, could you provide an example of the file or the exact codec, resolution and framerate of the video?
Can you confirm if the quality and resolution is of higher quality now?
If you are still seeing this, could you provide an example of the file or the exact codec, resolution and framerate of the video?
w....@gmail.com
What I'm trying to do is transfer photos and videos from my phone to my computer, where I keep my master copy of 20 years worth of photos. I don't want a higher resolution video, I want the original. For me, having my photos on Google Photos is nice, but it's secondary, TBH.
I tried using the Google Drive integration with Google Photos, but it was a nightmare because deleting a photo from Drive wouldn't necessarily delete it from Photos. Now I'm hoping to use the Google Photos API.
I tried downloading a video from Google Photos today, but the 50MB video from my phone resulted in a 13MB download. Also, the video was taken at a time as per the filename on my phone: 20181124_140007.mp4 but the EXIF data in the downloaded video had been rewritten by Google Photos and the only timestamp in there was 2018:11:24 16:48:07, which was probably the time that my phone uploaded the video. So now I have a poorer quality copy of my original video with the wrong timestamp.
And it's just this second dawned on me that I've deleted files from my phone to free up space, so the only original copy of those files is on Google Photos and I can't get access to them.
I'm just trying to keep a few files in sync between different devices. It shouldn't be this difficult.
I tried using the Google Drive integration with Google Photos, but it was a nightmare because deleting a photo from Drive wouldn't necessarily delete it from Photos. Now I'm hoping to use the Google Photos API.
I tried downloading a video from Google Photos today, but the 50MB video from my phone resulted in a 13MB download. Also, the video was taken at a time as per the filename on my phone: 20181124_140007.mp4 but the EXIF data in the downloaded video had been rewritten by Google Photos and the only timestamp in there was 2018:11:24 16:48:07, which was probably the time that my phone uploaded the video. So now I have a poorer quality copy of my original video with the wrong timestamp.
And it's just this second dawned on me that I've deleted files from my phone to free up space, so the only original copy of those files is on Google Photos and I can't get access to them.
I'm just trying to keep a few files in sync between different devices. It shouldn't be this difficult.
je...@gmail.com
what about this issue any news how to download the original file size, i have a video 2GB and when i download it it downloaded as 320MB and not working..
Any solution about this issue ???
Any solution about this issue ???
cf...@gmail.com
Hello
Any news about this issue. ?
Any news about this issue. ?
ho...@gmail.com
Hi,
someone work on it?
someone work on it?
na...@gmail.com
In answer to https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/80149160#comment15
I have recently discovered that my 1080p 60fps videos are now transcoded down to 30fps with high compression - they look terrible. But if I directly download them from the Google Photos Web they are fine. Why is the API transcoding, please?
Here is an example which I share globally for all to see.
Album =https://photos.app.goo.gl/Avm52meJycEH8N5o6 contains a single video showing the issue.
The attachment contains three copies of the video:
- the original file from the phone directly (1080p 60fps)
- the file as downloaded from the Google Photos Web (similar but not identical to the above)
- the file as downloaded from baseUrl with =dv -- this shows only 30 fps and file size is 1/10 of the above
I have recently discovered that my 1080p 60fps videos are now transcoded down to 30fps with high compression - they look terrible. But if I directly download them from the Google Photos Web they are fine. Why is the API transcoding, please?
Here is an example which I share globally for all to see.
Album =
The attachment contains three copies of the video:
- the original file from the phone directly (1080p 60fps)
- the file as downloaded from the Google Photos Web (similar but not identical to the above)
- the file as downloaded from baseUrl with =dv -- this shows only 30 fps and file size is 1/10 of the above
ka...@gmail.com
Hey Google. Any news here? Not sure why this was ever switched to a feature request type of ticket, as this is 100% a bug.
This is getting really ridiculous. This API has been the only means of interacting with Google Photos since you all did away with the Google Drive folder a couple months ago and yet we still can't get any traction on this issue that's been open for OVER A YEAR???? What kind of terrible management is going on over there that the person assigned to this hasn't been canned already for not completing their work?
For the love of all things holy Google... PLEASE FIX THIS DUMPSTER FIRE OF AN API!!!!
This is getting really ridiculous. This API has been the only means of interacting with Google Photos since you all did away with the Google Drive folder a couple months ago and yet we still can't get any traction on this issue that's been open for OVER A YEAR???? What kind of terrible management is going on over there that the person assigned to this hasn't been canned already for not completing their work?
For the love of all things holy Google... PLEASE FIX THIS DUMPSTER FIRE OF AN API!!!!
na...@gmail.com
I think step back on this or similiar issue when fetching video with =dv suffix
I'm using
com.google.photos.library:google-photos-library-client:1.4.0
to fetch videos. It was working pretty well but for some new videos i got issue IOException with reason 500 from google endpoints:
It describe itself more like this:
java.io.IOException: Server returned HTTP response code: 500 for URL:https://video-downloads.googleusercontent.com/ABzBgw2CdMg09PwSry__Bl [...]
this is (partial) output from fields of MediaItem
google.photos.types.MediaItem.base_url=https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/lr/AGWb-e6s [...]
google.photos.types.MediaItem.mime_type=video/mp4, google.photos.types.MediaItem.media_metadata=creation_time {
seconds: 1570301787
}
width: 576
height: 1024
video {
fps: 29.918403416437823
status: READY
}
, google.photos.types.MediaItem.filename=video-c523eb1bb7a18b3e31f97ac581bffabf-V.mp4}
all i do is append =dv to the end of baseUrl
I'm using
com.google.photos.library:google-photos-library-client:1.4.0
to fetch videos. It was working pretty well but for some new videos i got issue IOException with reason 500 from google endpoints:
It describe itself more like this:
java.io.IOException: Server returned HTTP response code: 500 for URL:
this is (partial) output from fields of MediaItem
google.photos.types.MediaItem.base_url=
google.photos.types.MediaItem.mime_type=video/mp4, google.photos.types.MediaItem.media_metadata=creation_time {
seconds: 1570301787
}
width: 576
height: 1024
video {
fps: 29.918403416437823
status: READY
}
, google.photos.types.MediaItem.filename=video-c523eb1bb7a18b3e31f97ac581bffabf-V.mp4}
all i do is append =dv to the end of baseUrl
co...@gmail.com
sorry for the above. I meant to paste it in related issue that point to this one. But there is also mention about 400 return from the endpoint not 500
mean:https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/111638708
I cannot remove above comment...
mean:
I cannot remove above comment...
to...@gmail.com
Is there any plan to fix this bug?
ol...@hppc.co.uk
Hi there also wishing that issue was prioritized :p
ik...@google.com
It's been nearly 3 years. Why has this not been fixed yet?
bu...@gmail.com
Bumping this...
to...@deck.cc
I second the people above, this should not be listed as a feature request - not having the ability to download an original quality video is obvious a bug. Also, coming up on the 2 year anniversary of this bug, which I can only imagine is a major blocker for anyone doing anything with video where the user expects high quality.
co...@gmail.com
I think this limitation is entirely deliberate, for limiting bandwidth and prevent a large number of apps most often than not using the original video rather than a smaller transcode.
ph...@gmail.com
Kinda like keeping a car under the speed limit by slashing it's tires. There are already limits and quotas in place, they could just make a new limit on data downloaded or on number of full quality video requests pretty easily.
da...@gmail.com
I'm using the Original Quality option and paying for storage, but I expect to also be able to download the Original Quality then. Please fix this _issue_ (this is not a feature request).
bt...@brandonthomson.com
That's my situation exactly. I had hoped to write something to auto backup all my photos and videos to my network attached storage every night, in case anything happens to my Google account.
bt...@brandonthomson.com
If you need some inspiration on the auto backup: I did exactly that. Working every week in my case flawlessly for months now. Didn't fix the video issue though... https://github.com/paranerd/backup-my-accounts
mc...@gmail.com
I to have written a backup service that works OK and I believe a few thousand people use it. But here is my list of Google API issues that mean that it is not a true backup https://github.com/gilesknap/gphotos-sync/issues/119
ha...@gmail.com
Any news on this? I just spent a whole bunch of time adding Google Photos support to our desktop video application only to discover that I can't retrieve video files in their original resolution, which unfortunately makes it useless to me.
ar...@gmail.com
Bumping this up as a user in need of the video feature
la...@gmail.com
+1
ge...@gmail.com
+1
ha...@gmail.com
+1
di...@gmail.com
+1
as...@gmail.com
+1
gr...@gmail.com
+1
su...@gmail.com
how do i download original quality video ???
sh...@gmail.com
+1
jo...@gmail.com
+1
th...@gmail.com
+1
jo...@gmail.com
+1
fr...@gmail.com
+1
th...@gmail.com
+1
se...@ginx.com.br
As a paying costumer, I would also like to be able to download my data at the original quality if I requested to using the API.
da...@gmail.com
Hey Google, dont be evil? please? we can all see where this is going...
ph...@gmail.com
As someone who's been paying for 1tb (now 2tb) google drive storage since 2015. I also demand that we should be able to download the original files as we uploaded them
ab...@gmail.com
I'll chime in that this is important to me as well, as another paying Google customer.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1
na...@gmail.com
+1
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
my problem is totally reverse
i can easily download the original video with =dv but =m18, =m22 etc simple dont work after full video encode
it works for a few then is gone
i can easily download the original video with =dv but =m18, =m22 etc simple dont work after full video encode
it works for a few then is gone
na...@gmail.com
+1
yo...@gmail.com
+1
pe...@gmail.com
+1
fe...@gmail.com
Hello Google,
any news on that topic? The first issue has been introduced in 2018. Would you please come with a solution? ${baseUrl}=dv does not work and it has definitely something to do with the exposed endpoint.
Many thanks
With best regards
jo...@gmail.com
Hello Google,
are you still working on this? I don't want do download my videos squished down in quality with the api...
are you still working on this? I don't want do download my videos squished down in quality with the api...
li...@gmail.com
+1
co...@gmail.com
As a paying customer I need this issue fixed asap. If not fixed in 1 month moving to icloud
Ja...@wetheinter.net
As a paying customer, I need this issue, and other issues related to syncing MY photos libraries with an external storage, to be fixed.
st...@gmail.com
when will this problem be solved, is anyone doing this at all?
jo...@gmail.com
Bueller, anyone????
Come on google, I'm PAYING you extra to store original quality video. you are holding my data ransom here... please fix this bug.
Come on google, I'm PAYING you extra to store original quality video. you are holding my data ransom here... please fix this bug.
Ja...@wetheinter.net
Dang :(
pa...@gmail.com
I second the importance of downloading an original quality video. This is absurd.
jo...@gmail.com
+1
gi...@gmail.com
+1
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1
jo...@gmail.com
deleted
da...@daave.com
Poor decision. OneDrive provides original quality via API.
jo...@gmail.com
My family's memories are now trapped in Google Photos. This is unacceptable.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1
gi...@gmail.com
This bug is still open after 4 years?!?!?!
ro...@gmail.com
+1
What the fuck is going here Google ? Do you want users let your services down ? I always lov(ed?) Android, but those kind of WFT is making me really reconsider it for the future
What the fuck is going here Google ? Do you want users let your services down ? I always lov(ed?) Android, but those kind of WFT is making me really reconsider it for the future
jo...@gmail.com
Wow, as a paying customer I'm disgusted that I can't get my original photos ans videos. I'm freaking paying for that exact reason. I'll be moving away for SURE, it's one thing on top of too many.
ro...@gmail.com
Is Google Takeout also affected with this ?
dr...@gmail.com
No Google Takeout is not affected, however it gives you a chaotic set of images/videos and metadata. It also takes maybe a day or so to download my library, so its not a very effective backup process.
wo...@gmail.com
+1
My data is too valuable to entrust to Google if they are going to snub their customers by not fixing a bug like this after knowing about it for 3 years. I'll be exfiltrating my Google One data and canceling my subscription ASAP.
My data is too valuable to entrust to Google if they are going to snub their customers by not fixing a bug like this after knowing about it for 3 years. I'll be exfiltrating my Google One data and canceling my subscription ASAP.
wo...@gmail.com
Quick poll - for those that have left gphotos due to this (or related) issues, what have you switched to instead?
fr...@gmail.com
As a paying customer I'm joining to the comments above. WTF, Google? Obviously, your infrastructure is able to return full raw original video since I can download it in original 4K60fps by google photos web UI. I need the same behavior in the API.
bo...@cbn-it.ro
@Google please raise the priority of this ER. It is a shame !
bo...@cbn-it.ro
Come on, Google, don't be evil and fix this. We shouldn't rely on Takeout to get the best versions of our videos.
vv...@gmail.com
+1
lu...@gmail.com
+1
hu...@gmail.com
bump this as this still an issue
do...@gmail.com
+1
fa...@gmail.com
+1
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1
ks...@gmail.com
+1
br...@gmail.com
+1000
vi...@umich.edu
+1
a....@gmail.com
M
go...@gmail.com
I never heard of Google Photos product previously although I have been working in Google Cloud Partner ecosystem for over two years, so am quite familiar with Google's product portfolio both in and outside Google Cloud.
When I learned about Google Photos from one of the Machine Learning courses that I am taking I thought that it sounds like a pretty good product so I spent some time to check it out. I liked the interface and the features but I also learned that this product does not allow to export the photos and videos back at their original resolution/quality level. This is vendor lock-in and is a deal breaker.
I cannot recommend this product to my customers and friends. In fact, I feel that now that I know about the vendor lock-in situation, it is my duty to mention this to any client or friend who is using Google Photos or is considering it. I also feel it is my duty to mention this every time I mention Google Photos in my line of work as an example of successful application of ML models.
I believe that in our time, and I'm writing this in year 2023, not allowing customers to export and take away all their data is socially unacceptable for a SaaS. I'm looking forward to this being fixed so that I can try this product again and begin recommending it to my clients and friends.
in...@gmail.com
Issue still there. Absolutely unacceptable for a paying customer like me. I have to look elsewhere now, thanks google photos.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
ge...@duzy.info
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1
cu...@gmail.com
+1
Please provide a solution to this
Please provide a solution to this
na...@gmail.com
+1
This is very frustrating; there shouldn't be a difference between downloading through API and through web browser
This is very frustrating; there shouldn't be a difference between downloading through API and through web browser
mr...@gmail.com
6 yeas wow
mv...@gmail.com
+1
sh...@fullsalon.me
Seriously, 6+ years without resolution?! This is an essential feature and I can't believe this hasn't been fixed yet. C'mon Google!!!!
ch...@gmail.com
Assignee
li...@google.com
Does this person(s) still work for Google?? Why would it take 6 yrs with no update??? I literally discovered this bug just AFTER signing up with 5tb plan. Well...just cancelled the account and moving to another provider.
li...@google.com
Does this person(s) still work for Google?? Why would it take 6 yrs with no update??? I literally discovered this bug just AFTER signing up with 5tb plan. Well...just cancelled the account and moving to another provider.
be...@lucidtechnics.com
It is worth noting that the open source Immich is becoming more and more a viable alternative to Google Photos.
I've started the process of migrating my large library over to a self-hosted instance. (You can export your photos with Google Takeout, and there are scripts to add back the metadata.)
Once you self-host, getting the highest quality version isn't a problem.
https://immich.app/
I've started the process of migrating my large library over to a self-hosted instance. (You can export your photos with Google Takeout, and there are scripts to add back the metadata.)
Once you self-host, getting the highest quality version isn't a problem.
ka...@gmail.com
Huh, is this still an issue? I’m in the process of migrating my media from dropbox to google photos now, but if I don’t have a programmatic way to access my original media… that entire effort is a non-starter.
Is there at least a private API we can use for this? How is the web interface accessing the media?
Is there at least a private API we can use for this? How is the web interface accessing the media?
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
I was trying to use Google Photos API and faced this problem.
How on earth is the core function of downloading the original video missing from the API? Do you say this is intentional?
Has anyone tried any workarounds, private APIs or anything else? There must be a way
How on earth is the core function of downloading the original video missing from the API? Do you say this is intentional?
Has anyone tried any workarounds, private APIs or anything else? There must be a way
rm...@gmail.com
+1
cr...@gmail.com
+1
al...@gmail.com
Vote for websocket on GAE!
an...@gmail.com
If 2576 is indeed complete, then I believe this is as well.
cramsdale@google.com
Access to native resources (such as a network stack) is now available via Managed VMs.
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/managed-vms/
There is also a sample project on GitHub that walks folks through how to do this.
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/appengine-websocketchat-java
cramsdale@google.com
Access to native resources (such as a network stack) is now available via Managed VMs.
There is also a sample project on GitHub that walks folks through how to do this.
qg...@gmail.com
Still, we need Websockets support on AppEngine as well!
Developing ManagedVM's apps is still complicated for now, since ManagedVM is beta
Developing ManagedVM's apps is still complicated for now, since ManagedVM is beta
go...@gmail.com
Without Websocket support, no way for us with AppEngine!
jo...@gmail.com
[Comment deleted]
al...@gmail.com
Yep, websockets are a must have nowadays. Skipping Google App Engine.
sh...@gmail.com
6 years. lol
ar...@highest-peak.net
where the hell is the support for websockets? even cloudflare managed to do this with their CDN, so you won't have any problem to do this too since your main issue is probably the load balancer before the domain.
oy...@gmail.com
:'(
ar...@gmail.com
Websockets plsease
ja...@gmail.com
Men this is so important to have!!
ng...@google.com
Thanks to everyone for your feedback. We recognize the importance of App Engine support for WebSockets[1][2] and are actively working on implementing this feature.
Further updates will be posted here.
[1]:https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6455
[2]:https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/comms.html#network
Further updates will be posted here.
[1]:
[2]:
ni...@gmail.com
PRAISE THE LORDS OF GOOGLE FOR THEY HAVE SMILED DOWN UPON US
BOW NOW BEFORE THEM
BOW NOW BEFORE THEM
ni...@gmail.com
/O\
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
[Comment deleted]
ar...@gmail.com
Yay.
pe...@gmail.com
Very good news! Timeline?
ma...@bkper.com
[Comment deleted]
an...@gmail.com
is it ready ?
ra...@gmail.com
I'm also trying to use Socket.io in the flexible Node framework, is there any known workaround for this issue?
All I get is:
Failed to load resource: ___ the server responded with a status of 400 (Bad Request)
All I get is:
Failed to load resource: ___ the server responded with a status of 400 (Bad Request)
zz...@verus.io
Any updates on this (or SSE support)?
st...@gmail.com
Channel API has been deprecated ... https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/java/release-notes .
It has been used by many of us as "workaround" to missing websocket support.
Google PLS update us about some ETA for "standard" WebSockets support.
It has been used by many of us as "workaround" to missing websocket support.
Google PLS update us about some ETA for "standard" WebSockets support.
vi...@gmail.com
What is the status of WebSockets on GAE? In node/express for example.
im...@gmail.com
I dont think making GAE a decent platform is Google's priority. They haven't closed this issue for more than 6 years and even today they are not giving any timeline. So I would highly recommend to move out of GAE, at least this is the feedback I got from talking to few professionals on stackoverflow and github.
ta...@google.com
ni...@gmail.com
Whoa! May I ask in what capacity this task is being looked at?
sh...@fullsalon.me
Are you kidding me? 8 years later. Will web sockets be released before the Channel API is turned off?
ja...@gmail.com
Amazing!
fr...@kurpiel.eng.br
Awesome!!! I'm dying to know how you'll do it without breaking the philosophy of appengine. And I hope it come on a double announcement with Java 8.
mr...@gmail.com
Woot!
bo...@shulha.pp.ua
So funny. Eight years later. Google, seriously? :)
al...@gmail.com
Since 2009 i am waiting for this feature from Google in App Engine, but till now there are no updates XMPP API and Channel API are not my preferred solution.
actually i tried a lot of alternative scenario till this added feature, but at the end the websocket is the best solution for a lot of business problem.
Still waiting websockets API in Google App Engine, hope so (:
actually i tried a lot of alternative scenario till this added feature, but at the end the websocket is the best solution for a lot of business problem.
Still waiting websockets API in Google App Engine, hope so (:
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Nice! I cant wait to implement Websockets AP in our webapp!
mm...@lex.vin
Is there an ETA for beta ws support?
bt...@gmail.com
An ETA for beta please. thx
ka...@gmail.com
The baby born when this ticket was opened is probably learning programming now. He/She will work to be a proficient programmer, join Google, implement Web Sockets API for App-Engine and close the ticket in 2035.
lk...@google.com
Hey folks, as you may have noticed we are actively working on providing Websockets support across App Engine, both standard and flex. Nothing more to report right now, but we'll use this issue to reach out in the coming months with more details. We're looking forward to enabling all of your apps with this functionality!
lk...@google.com
As the team works on websocket functionality we're looking for some feedback from everyone here to be sure we've got your use cases covered.
Please head over to this form when you have a chance, we really appreciate it!
https://goo.gl/forms/1HOPl6VlWDUn5czh2
Please head over to this form when you have a chance, we really appreciate it!
ti...@gmail.com
I can't use GAE, though I would love to, because it doesn't support my use case for websockets. I use GKE instead. I provided feedback, but I don't have an app id.
bl...@gmail.com
You guys still use GAE for your apps ? There are so many other platforms that are up-to-date to the latest tech. Maybe in 10 more years they're going to implement something "new" like support for NoSQL.
Still, I'm really impressed by Google. First time I see an 8 years old issue, you guys should really celebrate when this is done. Seriously, you made my day :))
Still, I'm really impressed by Google. First time I see an 8 years old issue, you guys should really celebrate when this is done. Seriously, you made my day :))
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Yeah the progress is kind of slow. Anyway, Cloud datastore is the NoSQL here. They did added a lot of features but when it comes to user request / support, it just better than non-existence .
bl...@gmail.com
Sorry I'm kind of out of loop since ws killed GAE for me, I don't know what's been done or what support it now has, just tried to make a pun. Heh, don't kill me now :D
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Yes Google really needs to advance its focus on GAE. At this moment all our software runs on Google Cloud Platform but partners and team members start talking about other solutions.
8 years !?! Come on .... With Microservices it's easy to move between several solutions, so Google has to compete on functionality and price.
8 years !?! Come on .... With Microservices it's easy to move between several solutions, so Google has to compete on functionality and price.
br...@gmail.com
Whining endlessly is not going to make things faster.
ni...@gmail.com
I actually thought Channel API already utilized websockets under the hood
whenever possible. Is that not the case?
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 5:07 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
whenever possible. Is that not the case?
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 5:07 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Compare this;
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/standard/java/javadoc/com/google/appengine/api/channel/package-summary
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/deprecations/channel
With these;
https://pusher.com/features
https://www.pubnub.com/products/global-data-stream-network/
Etc.
And the proposed Google 'solution';
"You can use the Firebase Realtime Database to achieve superior realtime functionality in your application"
Yes indeed, just change your database (no problem?)
With these;
Etc.
And the proposed Google 'solution';
"You can use the Firebase Realtime Database to achieve superior realtime functionality in your application"
Yes indeed, just change your database (no problem?)
sl...@gmail.com
It's really annoying that they deprecated the channel API so quickly, I didn't even know it was happening until last month, and we only have til later this year. Please extend it Google, or release an easy solution for us to switch to.
do...@gmail.com
Moving out the AppEngine standard to benefit from websocket in AppEngine
flex is a pain for existing applications...
Websocket is a must-have for any PWA, even on HTTP 2.0...
Find a way to have it persistent, even if you limit the payload (forcing
subsequent fetches to get all information).
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:50 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
flex is a pain for existing applications...
Websocket is a must-have for any PWA, even on HTTP 2.0...
Find a way to have it persistent, even if you limit the payload (forcing
subsequent fetches to get all information).
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:50 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
ph...@gmail.com
#160 - channel API uses long polling like it is 2004.
#161 - please, do not deter the issue into a channel API deprecation outcry... This issue is about web socket support.
#161 - please, do not deter the issue into a channel API deprecation outcry... This issue is about web socket support.
ob...@gmail.com
High levels of uric acid in a person's blood can be detected through blood tests http://obatherbalasamuratampuh.com
ko...@gmail.com
Samples for the golang sockets on GAE have not been made or documented.
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/appengine-sockets-python-java-go/tree/master/go_socket_demo
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/appengine-sockets-python-java-go/issues/3
Could someone help out?
Tried out the sockets documented here:
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/standard/go/sockets/reference
NOTHING WORKS.
Google help a sister out.
Could someone help out?
Tried out the sockets documented here:
NOTHING WORKS.
Google help a sister out.
mi...@hashtagfoundation.org
I don't want to distract the GAE devs who are finally getting around to the automated SSL certificates i've been begging for the last 7 years, but i've also been tracking this issue for just as long.
I need web socket support.
I need web socket support.
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Is there any timeline or description of future plans for GAE?
Our investors are getting nervous and we already ported parts of our software to docker containers with Google Container Engine on their behalf.
Will Google Container Engine replace GAE in the near future?
Some insight on this subject would be really helpful at this moment.
Our investors are getting nervous and we already ported parts of our software to docker containers with Google Container Engine on their behalf.
Will Google Container Engine replace GAE in the near future?
Some insight on this subject would be really helpful at this moment.
lk...@google.com
Websocket work is well underway, both for App Engine standard and flex, expect to hear about early tester programs shortly.
ni...@gmail.com
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
There is some documentation for web socket in app engine?
ma...@bkper.com
Since the web sockets API is not released yet, and Channel API was deprecated, we've migrated our channel infrastructure to Pusher ( https://pusher.com/ ) The migration was pretty straightforward (1 day) and its working really well. It would be great to test web sockets api to see if it also fits our needs. Thanks!
du...@gmail.com
Really excited about the coming support of websockts!
al...@gmail.com
how i can delet my account
sh...@fullsalon.me
It's been a while since the last update, can we get some feedback on where we stand and when the trusted tester program is launching? Thank you!
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
App engine firewall is now available.
Still no port forwarding, still no websockets #sad.
Still no port forwarding, still no websockets #sad.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
+1
We need a fast answer from Google about this issue !
#unacceptable
We need a fast answer from Google about this issue !
#unacceptable
ta...@google.com
Hi folks, quick update:
Thanks for your patience. I'm a manager for the engineering team delivering WebSockets for App Engine.
I can't give specific dates, but know that we're working hard to support WebSockets. Our first goal is to launch an early access preview (EAP) with a few high need and early adopter customers (read: willing to put up with breakage and incompatible changes). Supporting it involves changing some long baked assumptions around instance lifecycles, request flows, and runtime behaviors, so there have been some big hurdles to overcome. We've solutions for the implications and are implementing now.
-Tad
Thanks for your patience. I'm a manager for the engineering team delivering WebSockets for App Engine.
I can't give specific dates, but know that we're working hard to support WebSockets. Our first goal is to launch an early access preview (EAP) with a few high need and early adopter customers (read: willing to put up with breakage and incompatible changes). Supporting it involves changing some long baked assumptions around instance lifecycles, request flows, and runtime behaviors, so there have been some big hurdles to overcome. We've solutions for the implications and are implementing now.
-Tad
sh...@fullsalon.me
Sounds good, sign me up, thanks for the update!
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Oh, nice !
I'm in... breakage and incompatible changes are allways better than an useless work while trying to implement outdated Google's code samples
i.e : -https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/nodejs-docs-samples/tree/master/appengine/websockets
/!\ WARNING -> Don't even read it, merly unusable broken pieces in a jigsaw where most of the parts are leaking.
#cheers - just don't forget to purge these out of your GitHub's reference.
I'm in... breakage and incompatible changes are allways better than an useless work while trying to implement outdated Google's code samples
i.e : -
/!\ WARNING -> Don't even read it, merly unusable broken pieces in a jigsaw where most of the parts are leaking.
#cheers - just don't forget to purge these out of your GitHub's reference.
pa...@gmail.com
Hi. Will Meteor apps running on flex-env be supported with this new implementation?
mi...@kristovar.com
very exciting.... should we post project IDs here for the EAP, or will you link to an opt-in form like with the automated certificates feature?
i understand all the baked in assumptions about the request flows, to the point where i figured it wouldn't be possible to integrate with existing GAE networks... will the whitelisted projects move to a different network that might suffer in other ways while the websockets feature is worked out, or will they remain in place?
i understand all the baked in assumptions about the request flows, to the point where i figured it wouldn't be possible to integrate with existing GAE networks... will the whitelisted projects move to a different network that might suffer in other ways while the websockets feature is worked out, or will they remain in place?
lk...@google.com
No need to post project IDs here. We'll provide a form shortly!
lk...@google.com
Ok folks, if you're interested in gaining early access to test this feature for both the standard and flexible environments, please complete this form:
https://goo.gl/forms/0A1U9qC3YBfg21Oy2
sh...@fullsalon.me
Form filled out, when should we expect to hear back? Thanks!
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Yes, form filled out two weeks ago and GAE test project ready for Web Socket usage; we are ready to go!
st...@google.com
Thanks! Your enthusiasm fuels our motivation. I am replacing Lorne as Product Manager for this feature.
We expect to send the first invites within a week. Note that this depends on what criteria (runtime / env) you filled in the form.
We expect to send the first invites within a week. Note that this depends on what criteria (runtime / env) you filled in the form.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Well I've submitted an application for this early access program and for a moment things were looking good. The first 30-40 websocket requests were looking good! Then it just stopped working, returning 501 errors.
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
We've submitted an application for the early access program, but nothing...
And we're waiting for a long long long... time...
Op za 7 okt. 2017 18:29 schreef <buganizer-system@google.com>:
And we're waiting for a long long long... time...
Op za 7 okt. 2017 18:29 schreef <buganizer-system@google.com>:
st...@google.com
Thanks for your patience.
Websockets are not yet ready for all languages and environments. As I mentioned, we use the information you provided in the form to send invitations.
If you received an invitation, you should have been added to the alpha tester Google group. Please prefer sending feedback in the Google group rather than on this bug.
Websockets are not yet ready for all languages and environments. As I mentioned, we use the information you provided in the form to send invitations.
If you received an invitation, you should have been added to the alpha tester Google group. Please prefer sending feedback in the Google group rather than on this bug.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Thanks applied to beta program. Eagerly waiting for this feature.
ca...@emerald.li
I really like the Google cloud platform, was very happy with it until I deployed and... discovered all my websockets were broken. When I found out there wasn't websocket support I was literally devastated.
I'm looking over to migrate my app from Heroku to your platform but I cannot do that unless you have websocket support. I am simply not able to or willing to refactor, so the platform must have the support for web sockets.
I spend $1000 a month on Heroku, that's about $12,000 a year that will be spent on your platform, please please please implement this and get it finished as soon as possible, I am thinking of going over to Amazon but I am holding off because I don't want to do that believe me!
I signed up for the test also, please please get this done soon it really is important to many devs, many of which I am sure didn't even find this. I had to scour the web to find it after all.
I'm looking over to migrate my app from Heroku to your platform but I cannot do that unless you have websocket support. I am simply not able to or willing to refactor, so the platform must have the support for web sockets.
I spend $1000 a month on Heroku, that's about $12,000 a year that will be spent on your platform, please please please implement this and get it finished as soon as possible, I am thinking of going over to Amazon but I am holding off because I don't want to do that believe me!
I signed up for the test also, please please get this done soon it really is important to many devs, many of which I am sure didn't even find this. I had to scour the web to find it after all.
ni...@gmail.com
We have websockets working on the cloud platform. You just have to do it
through a compute engine VM. For us we're using vert.x + sockJS.
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:40 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
through a compute engine VM. For us we're using vert.x + sockJS.
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:40 AM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
st...@google.com
As a reminder: Please fill in this form to get early access to the feature: https://goo.gl/forms/bAXjyYL5Nh3oZVhh1
Depending on your language and environment, you might receive an invitation.
Depending on your language and environment, you might receive an invitation.
ca...@emerald.li
Hello @st...@google.com
is there an ETA on this yet?
I signed the form but received nothing, I am guessing no access for Ruby developers yet?
is there an ETA on this yet?
I signed the form but received nothing, I am guessing no access for Ruby developers yet?
ca...@emerald.li
dv...@gmail.com
@st...@google.com
I just saw an announcement of Java 7 appEngine being replaced by Java 8 appEngine. Advantages listed for Java 8 included: "availability of all public JDK APIs, and ability to use java.io.File, threads, and any Java libraries."
Does that mean that appEngine on Java 8 can use Web Sockets API without the beta?
I just saw an announcement of Java 7 appEngine being replaced by Java 8 appEngine. Advantages listed for Java 8 included: "availability of all public JDK APIs, and ability to use java.io.File, threads, and any Java libraries."
Does that mean that appEngine on Java 8 can use Web Sockets API without the beta?
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
As a Google App Engine developer i thought about creating a custom desktop towards https://poloniex.com/support/api/ for a little support towards my crypto trades.
Poloniex uses a push API over WebSockets using the WAMP protocolhttp://wamp-proto.org/ .
Is the brand new GAE web-socket API we're all anxiously waiting for supporting the WAMP protocol?
Poloniex uses a push API over WebSockets using the WAMP protocol
Is the brand new GAE web-socket API we're all anxiously waiting for supporting the WAMP protocol?
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
I see the last comment here was of 25th of december 2017, which is now about 3 months ago. Is there any new information available on this issue?
an...@gmail.com
It has been 6 months since the last update from Google (the start of alpha testing). Can you give us some idea about when a beta version will be available?
fr...@gmail.com
Dupe
fr...@gmail.com
As a Google app engine developer I gave up waiting and am just not really a Google app engine developer. This issue is so damn old and I've been waiting so damn long I've moved to Amazon for the most part. Whatever I wanted websockets on app engine for, I forget. And now I'm finally unsubscribing from this list
tu...@gmail.com
I've also moved to Amazon, this was a blocker for a silly amount of time.
ni...@gmail.com
While I agree that it's a necessary feature, you can easily use compute
engine to host the websocket connection. This is what we have done.
On Mar 12, 2018 5:10 PM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
engine to host the websocket connection. This is what we have done.
On Mar 12, 2018 5:10 PM, <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Yes there're other options (containers, compute engine, firebird, third party api etc.), but this issue is a sign on the wall ...
mk...@gmail.com
This ticket has been around for an aweful lot of time. Could it at least be implemented as a pass-through to other services by google that implement websockets?
in...@gmail.com
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
So the solution is to use App Engine Flexible?
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
If I am not mistaken, App Engine flexible doesn't support websockets either. The solution is to setup a Compute Engine for your websocket connections...
do...@autofleet.io
Any googlers comment?
kn...@google.com
Hi everyone, we're actively working on bringing Websockets to Beta on App Engine flexible.
an...@gmail.com
Thanks for the update. Will Websockets be rolled out to App Engine standard after that or will it only ever work on the flexible environment?
ph...@gmail.com
#212 - comment 183 noted it will be brought to the App Engine standard as well - is this no longer planned?
kn...@google.com
App Engine standard Websockets support is still planned, but will take longer. Based on the EAP feedback we decided to make some infrastructure changes first, so it will likely not land this year.
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
It is official, we get our 10 year 'Web Sockets API issue' celebration in 2019 !!!
jo...@gmail.com
Does this mean I can use gorilla websocket on app flexible enviroment? https://github.com/gorilla/websocket ?
kn...@google.com
Hi John, we haven't tested gorilla websockets specifically, but the intention is to support common websockets frameworks.
jo...@gmail.com
Can i use it in my app without any configuración?
kn...@google.com
Not yet - I'll update here when it's launched publicly.
ra...@shine.fr
Any news on this ?
fe...@gmail.com
Oh sad
ke...@gmail.com
Still nothing? Websockets on node App Engine Standard is the only technical feature i need before i can decide if i go with google cloud or something else... please keep us updated...
ka...@group.riehle.org
Very much looking forward to this for some time now, and it is sad to see this moving so slowly. We've got everything set up on GCE instead like many comments here suggested, but maintaining those VMs ist just a hassle compared the nicely managed GAE components of the application.
Having websockets on GAE standard for node.js would be perfect. but even on flexible would be a step up from managing our own VMs.
Having websockets on GAE standard for node.js would be perfect. but even on flexible would be a step up from managing our own VMs.
de...@gmail.com
hi #223 please read #215 and other @google.com tweets before sending those emails to all of us :)
yes, we would all love to have this feature and they work on it
google may want to push Firebase and the engineers cannot help management policy
or they just need to wait for (or implement) an infrastructure change first
we will eventually get websockets but you should try something else for the next year or two I guess
thanks
yes, we would all love to have this feature and they work on it
google may want to push Firebase and the engineers cannot help management policy
or they just need to wait for (or implement) an infrastructure change first
we will eventually get websockets but you should try something else for the next year or two I guess
thanks
an...@gmail.com
Google, it's been over three months since you said you were making this available as a beta version. When can we expect a beta for the Flexible Environment?
And also can you provide a more specific timeline for enabling it in the Standard Environment? When you say "it will likely not land this year", does that mean next year? Or more like three to five years?
And also can you provide a more specific timeline for enabling it in the Standard Environment? When you say "it will likely not land this year", does that mean next year? Or more like three to five years?
wa...@gmail.com
I keep this issues starred to make me feel better about my own companies' average ticket age. :) We should put together a celebration on the 10 year anniversary of this bug. Only a year and a half more. I feel like there's a good chance it might still be open by then. :D
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Yes of course the ticket age is terrible (Dec 18, 2009 04:07PM), but the biggest problem is the timeline.
For a company relying on Google App Engine we really need to know the path to the future.
What is Google doing on/with Google App Engine (standard)?
Should we completely move to Kubernetes/Container Engine (is that the intention)?
For a company relying on Google App Engine we really need to know the path to the future.
What is Google doing on/with Google App Engine (standard)?
Should we completely move to Kubernetes/Container Engine (is that the intention)?
ma...@dfrag.tv
#228 - I wouldn't wait, we've already made the move to Kubernetes. Haven't looked back since.
be...@gmail.com
It seems like this is more of a joke issue by now. Doesn't seem like this is even on the radar for Google.
kn...@google.com
Hi everyone, we are making steady progress on the Flex Websockets Beta launch and will be making it available soon.
Websockets for Standard are at least a year away. I'll continue to update here as we get more clarity on the timeline.
Websockets for Standard are at least a year away. I'll continue to update here as we get more clarity on the timeline.
da...@gmail.com
Thanks for the update!
While "at least a year away" does not sound too good, it is at least good to know that Google is still working on this feature.
It would have been great to have something available *before* shutting down the Channel API as this caused a lot of pain. We have migrated to Pusher and it would be great if websockets on Google Cloud would provide a similar feature set and not just the networking capabilities to implement something like Pusher on top of App Engine ourselves.
While "at least a year away" does not sound too good, it is at least good to know that Google is still working on this feature.
It would have been great to have something available *before* shutting down the Channel API as this caused a lot of pain. We have migrated to Pusher and it would be great if websockets on Google Cloud would provide a similar feature set and not just the networking capabilities to implement something like Pusher on top of App Engine ourselves.
al...@gmail.com
My experience with GAE was so, so smooth up until yesterday, after 3 months of building all my processes around it, when I tried connecting to my shiny new websocket endpoint and was greeted with a mysterious 400 response. After much searching I finally found this issue.
How is it possible that in 2018 something as basic as a websocket server is just not supported? A little heads up in the Getting Started documentation would've been nice. I have to go back to Heroku now. I don't wanna go back to Heroku.
Also...guys, this issue's been open for almost 10 years. Google has figured out how to offer sophisticated processors designed to accelerate the training of AI models as a service. But websockets? Nah...that kind of technology is "at least a year away".
This needs to be a meme.
How is it possible that in 2018 something as basic as a websocket server is just not supported? A little heads up in the Getting Started documentation would've been nice. I have to go back to Heroku now. I don't wanna go back to Heroku.
Also...guys, this issue's been open for almost 10 years. Google has figured out how to offer sophisticated processors designed to accelerate the training of AI models as a service. But websockets? Nah...that kind of technology is "at least a year away".
This needs to be a meme.
am...@gmail.com
am...@gmail.com
there is workarounds anyway so why bother?
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:06, Amirouche Boubekki <
amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> a écrit :
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:06, Amirouche Boubekki <
amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> a écrit :
fa...@gmail.com
I've been watching this thread for a while and you guys need to realize that it's not as simple as enabling websocket on appengine. AppEngine kills and starts instances all the time, that means if you have your own custom websocket app you'll be managing it's state across different instances. Let's say you just let an instance live while a connection is present, would you want a single instance handling only 1 connection or let's say you have lots of requests that spawned 20 instances for only the next 10 minutes, now your connections are shared across those 20 instances but it could be handled by 1. You can't just let it live for the next few hours if it's not necessary, it's a waste of resources. The way I see appengine anyway is it's just a frontend to your custom apps that's also stateless and if you have a very custom websocket needs that scales infinitely you'll have to manage it or you can use third party like firebase if you don't want to manage it. I don't know how they will be implementing websockets on appengine, my guess is it's like channels where connections are delegated to a scalable websocket service and you communicate using rpc/provided library.
am...@gmail.com
the workaround I was thinking about is storing state in database maybe even
as blob of json so that in the end it loads very fast, but has the current
state of the interaction with the user. Depending on your requirements,
persistence might short span of life or long like always. The more
durability you ask for the more cost it incures. Now, they are optimization
that plays with whatever limit (or minimal life span) before the unit of
work is killed and re-scheduled. In serverless the lifetam is around a 1
minute.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:28, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
as blob of json so that in the end it loads very fast, but has the current
state of the interaction with the user. Depending on your requirements,
persistence might short span of life or long like always. The more
durability you ask for the more cost it incures. Now, they are optimization
that plays with whatever limit (or minimal life span) before the unit of
work is killed and re-scheduled. In serverless the lifetam is around a 1
minute.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:28, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
am...@gmail.com
the life span can be immediatly die, like a message in publish/subscribe
pattern, there might be no subscribers.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:36, Amirouche Boubekki <
amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> a écrit :
pattern, there might be no subscribers.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 22:36, Amirouche Boubekki <
amirouche.boubekki@gmail.com> a écrit :
sp...@gmail.com
Yep, it's very much non-trivial in App Engine. The other aspect that you have the take in account, in addition to nodes spawning/respawning constantly, is that App Engine is built for sites that can scale up to many millions of simultaneous users on demand.
You can see that services like Firestore (beta) only support up to 100,000 simultaneous connections -https://firebase.google.com/docs/firestore/quotas .
The same is true for the Firebase Real Time Database -https://firebase.google.com/docs/database/usage/limits .
Are there any current websocket implementation out there in production than can handle 10+ million simultaneous connections?
I would imagine that this would require some special pricing and accounting as well.
For now, you can simply create a GCE or GKE instance that handles your websocket traffic.
You can see that services like Firestore (beta) only support up to 100,000 simultaneous connections -
The same is true for the Firebase Real Time Database -
Are there any current websocket implementation out there in production than can handle 10+ million simultaneous connections?
I would imagine that this would require some special pricing and accounting as well.
For now, you can simply create a GCE or GKE instance that handles your websocket traffic.
am...@gmail.com
Another workaround I can see, is that the UI does need to handle network
connectivity one way or another in other it has error handling code. Some
how like cat, it can make the user have patience without leaving him with
nothing, like in browser editor that backups to leveldb. A retry loop will
queue tasks to retry later. It may be transparent to the user.
From the backend perspective opening up a websocket say 1 minute of
connectivity every 1s is good enough to synchronize a wysiwyg editor state.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 23:07, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
connectivity one way or another in other it has error handling code. Some
how like cat, it can make the user have patience without leaving him with
nothing, like in browser editor that backups to leveldb. A retry loop will
queue tasks to retry later. It may be transparent to the user.
From the backend perspective opening up a websocket say 1 minute of
connectivity every 1s is good enough to synchronize a wysiwyg editor state.
Le jeu. 2 août 2018 à 23:07, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
de...@gmail.com
Some good insights at last, not just (aggressively) complaining but guessing and trying to actually understand things... another insight might be that things have businees aspects as well... google management may want to push its own higher level implementations and sell them? I guess Firebase and Co. cost more than your own websocket stuff would... But now I also see it might be a technological challenge as well.
As topic related, until websockets are available (and we really should accept that there are tecnological and businness considerations, google is not a charity employing infinite number of gods after all...) I would be interested why xhr long polling is no alternative for you guys waiting.
As topic related, until websockets are available (and we really should accept that there are tecnological and businness considerations, google is not a charity employing infinite number of gods after all...) I would be interested why xhr long polling is no alternative for you guys waiting.
ca...@unityworks.se
Long polling and server sent events (SSE) seem to respond to a request but holds the connection. I wonder if it's possible to use them since GSAE have 60s deadline for a response. Have anyone tried it?
bo...@cbn-it.ro
I haven't tried that, but if your problem is the 60s deadline, you can use backend instances.
I am using firebase realtime database for sending messages to my webUI. I write the info to certain paths in firebase and from webUI i listen for them. I know its not bi-directional, but for sending messages to server i use HTTP requests and for Server to Client messages i use firebase.
I am using firebase realtime database for sending messages to my webUI. I write the info to certain paths in firebase and from webUI i listen for them. I know its not bi-directional, but for sending messages to server i use HTTP requests and for Server to Client messages i use firebase.
de...@gmail.com
Thanks for the answers. I think this list would be more productive if we shared/discussed how we tried to actually solve the absence of websockets. I myself (for a 2 person game where a move has to happen in a minute) first chose websockets after some research, then I realised it is not available, but I like google stuff and gae, so then I joined this list and considered Firebase (which uses websockets) but I find it in my case aiming to a mosquito with a canon, so I chose xhr long polling.
I have not tested it yet but I am pretty sure it is going to work. I could also send another post request every minute I guess if needed and I would lose a round trip time + (re)identification time of client at most (from the real time effect). I must add although I have some technical background I do not consider myself an expert in this field... So I am always happy to listen to more experienced developers. I would appreciate what you guys think are the caveats/limitations/experiences with long polling and other websocket alternatives you tried or planning to try. As soon as I have practical experiences I will be happy to share if you are interested. (business... yes, I can spell it correctly! :)
I have not tested it yet but I am pretty sure it is going to work. I could also send another post request every minute I guess if needed and I would lose a round trip time + (re)identification time of client at most (from the real time effect). I must add although I have some technical background I do not consider myself an expert in this field... So I am always happy to listen to more experienced developers. I would appreciate what you guys think are the caveats/limitations/experiences with long polling and other websocket alternatives you tried or planning to try. As soon as I have practical experiences I will be happy to share if you are interested. (business... yes, I can spell it correctly! :)
an...@gmail.com
The easiest workaround is to use a third party service that implements websockets for you, such as Pusher: https://pusher.com/ .
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
Ok, maybe it's not easy to implement a feature which supports all App
Engine use-cases (possibilities) but Google could easily implement (or even
buy) a solution like Pusher and add it to App Engine... I think most users
will be satisfied with a solution like this ... "something is better than
nothing ..."
2018-08-03 18:44 GMT+02:00 <buganizer-system@google.com>:
Engine use-cases (possibilities) but Google could easily implement (or even
buy) a solution like Pusher and add it to App Engine... I think most users
will be satisfied with a solution like this ... "something is better than
nothing ..."
2018-08-03 18:44 GMT+02:00 <buganizer-system@google.com>:
se...@brevetti.ai
Hi kn...@google.com
Thank you very much for dedicating resources to building this feature. I am developing anASP.NET Core 2.1 application using SignalR (which is based on WebSockets) and I am hosting it in Google App Engine. I really want to test out your beta of the WebSocket support.
Do you have any idea of when this will be available? Later this month? Next month? End of Q3? Q4?
Thank you very much for dedicating resources to building this feature. I am developing an
Do you have any idea of when this will be available? Later this month? Next month? End of Q3? Q4?
se...@brevetti.ai
Hey. Is there any update on this?
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Would be very useful to have this
lo...@gmail.com
Hello,
Websockets are definitely a requirement for our project. Lack of support will drive us away from Google Cloud i am afraid.
Websockets are definitely a requirement for our project. Lack of support will drive us away from Google Cloud i am afraid.
al...@gmail.com
I think it's fair to say that there's zero to little actual momentum behind this. I had to hold my nose and switch everything over to Elastic Beanstalk (AWS's GAE equivalent). The development workflow is nowhere near as clean and easy as GAE (it made me miss it). But, now I have websockets, and I didn't want to still be posting "Any updates?" in 2029.
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
First we tried Firebase, but we ended up with the complete Android package in our project.
Therefore Firebase is no option in its current form (in our opinion).
As a 'quick' shift we're using Pusher for web socket use-cases.
Meanwhile we're migrating all our projects to Kubernetes to escape situation like this issue in the future.
Therefore Firebase is no option in its current form (in our opinion).
As a 'quick' shift we're using Pusher for web socket use-cases.
Meanwhile we're migrating all our projects to Kubernetes to escape situation like this issue in the future.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
It would be really nice to know at least the planned release date of this feature.
do...@gmail.com
2009 -> 2018, still nothing ?
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
I've created a 10 Year Anniversary countdown for this incredible issue;
https://goo.gl/2ND2r9
420 days, 14 hours, 7 minutes and 10 seconds to go
420 days, 14 hours, 7 minutes and 10 seconds to go
eb...@gmail.com
"Best engineers in the world", this is a disgrace.
me...@gmail.com
Google targeting big player with googlecloud. They dont care about small project.
Well, i cant pay 1000-5000$ for testing my project. But who cares? 10 years and doingnothing. Is this realy Google?
Well, i cant pay 1000-5000$ for testing my project. But who cares? 10 years and doingnothing. Is this realy Google?
an...@gmail.com
Google, it's been seven months since you said you were preparing to release this as a beta for the Flexible Environment. Can you please provide an update of when we can expect this?
rh...@gmail.com
Do you have to wait 10 more years for websocket in standard environment? Or does the standard environment support websocket? I can not find any related materials. Someone please let me know.
ma...@gmail.com
Standard env doesn't support WebSocket
Neither 1st and 2nd generation.
Sure ... I've tested ;-)
Le jeu. 15 nov. 2018 à 01:42, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
Neither 1st and 2nd generation.
Sure ... I've tested ;-)
Le jeu. 15 nov. 2018 à 01:42, <buganizer-system@google.com> a écrit :
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
-
de...@gmail.com
Jul 23, 2018 11:30PM: "Websockets for Standard are at least a year away. I'll continue to update here as we get more clarity on the timeline."
this means ETA: from 2019-08-01 to 2020-08-01... bitte schön
they do seem to work actively on it, please read former @google tweets before posting your usual frustrated hate postings
I guess you got what you wanted as kids crying loud or you just do not seem to be growing up ;)
this means ETA: from 2019-08-01 to 2020-08-01... bitte schön
they do seem to work actively on it, please read former @google tweets before posting your usual frustrated hate postings
I guess you got what you wanted as kids crying loud or you just do not seem to be growing up ;)
pa...@gmail.com
i think how to implement this without adding proprietory technology ( like channel api etc ) is the biggest constrain here.
az...@gmail.com
I like Google Cloud, and I would like to use App Engine with websockets rather than switch to AWS Elastic Beanstalk, which I have already confirmed works well with websockets. Currently I am evaluating switching over to Kubernetes, but would prefer a managed service like App Engine.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
This thread is a rollercoaster of emotion. I hope all the engineers over there have a very nice thanksgiving holiday and stuff themselves silly and then stuff the app engine full of websocket support.
Twas the night before Christmas, when all thro' the house
Not a dev was stirring, nor even their spouse;
The sockets were promised, “soon they’ll be here!”
In hopes that St. Google would deliver them there;
The devs were nestled all snug in beds,
While visions of websockets danced in their heads
Twas the night before Christmas, when all thro' the house
Not a dev was stirring, nor even their spouse;
The sockets were promised, “soon they’ll be here!”
In hopes that St. Google would deliver them there;
The devs were nestled all snug in beds,
While visions of websockets danced in their heads
al...@gmail.com
Just to throw my hat in the ring to say I like everyone else here would greatly appreciate websocket support - but also to say kudos to #265 for expressing this in such a poetically brilliant way.
ro...@arcus-solutions.nl
-
ti...@gmail.com
Any changes?
kn...@google.com
Hi everyone,
I'm really happy to let you all know that WebSockets support for App Engine Flex is now in Beta!
Here's the documentation:
Python:https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/flexible/python/using-websockets-and-session-affinity
Java:https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/flexible/java/using-websockets-and-session-affinity
Nodejs:https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/flexible/nodejs/using-websockets-and-session-affinity
It will work for other languages as well, we just don't have samples and dedicated docs pages yet.
P.S. Thank you Justin in #265 for the brilliant poem :)
I'm really happy to let you all know that WebSockets support for App Engine Flex is now in Beta!
Here's the documentation:
Python:
Java:
Nodejs:
It will work for other languages as well, we just don't have samples and dedicated docs pages yet.
P.S. Thank you Justin in #265 for the brilliant poem :)
jd...@slb.com
Good news! thanks for this
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
This is *such* great news! Thanks to everyone involved, this will make things really smooth.
jo...@gmail.com
What about server sent events(sse) ?
ev...@gmail.com
What is the timeline for docs for the other languages? And/or, what would the setup look like for Golang?
kn...@google.com
We aren't planning to add support for server side events.
We will be adding docs for Go, likely before we "graduate" the feature out of Beta.
We will be adding docs for Go, likely before we "graduate" the feature out of Beta.
uk...@gmail.com
Holy Mother Earth, this is cool, will docs for Ruby also be added at the same time?
en...@gmail.com
Is there any hope for web sockets support for App Engine Standard (Python3.7)?
kn...@google.com
Hi, we'd like to eventually expend our Websockets support, but it's still very far out for App Engine Standard. If you're currently building an app that requires Websockets, I wouldn't recommend using App Engine Standard.
ro...@undeadindustries.com
Any updates on getting websockets working with Golang?
kn...@google.com
Websockets on Flex already work with all Flex languages, including golang.
We're working on adding the documentation for those languages.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 1:06 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
We're working on adding the documentation for those languages.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 1:06 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Can i use WSS ou just WS protocol?
ya...@google.com
WSS is also supported.
th...@gmail.com
Do you think Google Cloud Run will support Websockets sooner than Google App Engine Standard?
kn...@google.com
Hi, we don't have anything to announce at this time about Websockets for
Cloud Run. I can tell though you that it's not something that's coming in
the next few quarters; if you need to use Websockets right now, I'd
recommend App Engine Flex or GKE.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 3:37 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
Cloud Run. I can tell though you that it's not something that's coming in
the next few quarters; if you need to use Websockets right now, I'd
recommend App Engine Flex or GKE.
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 3:37 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
kn...@google.com
Hi everyone, I'm happy to announce that Websockets support for Flex is now Generally Available! We've made no changes since Beta but Websockets traffic is now subject to our SLA.
We've also published documentation for this feature for all App Engine Flex languages.
We've also published documentation for this feature for all App Engine Flex languages.
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
Thank you thank you thank you :party:
ha...@gmail.com
I am trying to create a websocket server on my Google App Engine Flex environment. I still seem to get the following error:
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.api.UpgradeException: Failed to upgrade to websocket: Unexpected HTTP Response Status Code: 400 Bad Request at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.reportGet(CompletableFuture.java:357) at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.get(CompletableFuture.java:1895) at interContILP.SendServlet.sendMessageOverWebSocket(SendServlet.java:150) at interContILP.SendServlet.doPost(SendServlet.java:90) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:707) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:790) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHolder.handle(ServletHolder.java:848) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1772) at com.google.apphosting.utils.servlet.JdbcMySqlConnectionCleanupFilter.doFilter(JdbcMySqlConnectionCleanupFilter.java:60) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1759) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doHandle(ServletHandler.java:582) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:143) at org.eclipse.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java:524) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doHandle(SessionHandler.java:226) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:143) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:134) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.ParseBlobUploadHandler.handle(ParseBlobUploadHandler.java:119) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doHandle(ContextHandler.java:1182) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.AppEngineWebAppContext.doHandle(AppEngineWebAppContext.java:187) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doScope(ServletHandler.java:512) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doScope(SessionHandler.java:185) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doScope(ContextHandler.java:1112) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:141) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.AppVersionHandlerMap.handle(AppVersionHandlerMap.java:293) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:134) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.handle(Server.java:539) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.HttpChannel.handle(HttpChannel.java:333) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.RpcConnection.handle(RpcConnection.java:213) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.RpcConnector.serviceRequest(RpcConnector.java:81) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.JettyServletEngineAdapter.serviceRequest(JettyServletEngineAdapter.java:134) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.dispatchServletRequest(JavaRuntime.java:722) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.dispatchRequest(JavaRuntime.java:685) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.run(JavaRuntime.java:655) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$NullSandboxRequestRunnable.run(JavaRuntime.java:847) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.ThreadGroupPool$PoolEntry.run(ThreadGroupPool.java:270) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) Caused by: org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.api.UpgradeException: Failed to upgrade to websocket: Unexpected HTTP Response Status Code: 400 Bad Request at org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.client.WebSocketUpgradeRequest.onComplete(WebSocketUpgradeRequest.java:527) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.ResponseNotifier.notifyComplete(ResponseNotifier.java:196) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.ResponseNotifier.notifyComplete(ResponseNotifier.java:188) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.HttpReceiver.terminateResponse(HttpReceiver.java:441) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.HttpReceiver.responseSuccess(HttpReceiver.java:387) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.messageComplete(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:316) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.handleContentMessage(HttpParser.java:599) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseContent(HttpParser.java:1669) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:1517) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.parse(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:172) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.process(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:135) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.receive(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:73) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpChannelOverHTTP.receive(HttpChannelOverHTTP.java:133) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpConnectionOverHTTP.onFillable(HttpConnectionOverHTTP.java:155) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.AbstractConnection$ReadCallback.succeeded(AbstractConnection.java:305) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.FillInterest.fillable(FillInterest.java:103) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection$DecryptedEndPoint.onFillable(SslConnection.java:427) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection.onFillable(SslConnection.java:321) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection$2.succeeded(SslConnection.java:159) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.FillInterest.fillable(FillInterest.java:103) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ChannelEndPoint$2.run(ChannelEndPoint.java:117) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.runTask(EatWhatYouKill.java:333) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.doProduce(EatWhatYouKill.java:310) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.tryProduce(EatWhatYouKill.java:168) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.run(EatWhatYouKill.java:126) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.ReservedThreadExecutor$ReservedThread.run(ReservedThreadExecutor.java:366) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:698) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$Runner.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:804) ... 1 more
I am wondering what "Websockets traffic is now subject to our SLA." --- Any suggestions would be appreciated.
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.api.UpgradeException: Failed to upgrade to websocket: Unexpected HTTP Response Status Code: 400 Bad Request at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.reportGet(CompletableFuture.java:357) at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.get(CompletableFuture.java:1895) at interContILP.SendServlet.sendMessageOverWebSocket(SendServlet.java:150) at interContILP.SendServlet.doPost(SendServlet.java:90) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:707) at javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:790) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHolder.handle(ServletHolder.java:848) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1772) at com.google.apphosting.utils.servlet.JdbcMySqlConnectionCleanupFilter.doFilter(JdbcMySqlConnectionCleanupFilter.java:60) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1759) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doHandle(ServletHandler.java:582) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:143) at org.eclipse.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java:524) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doHandle(SessionHandler.java:226) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:143) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:134) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.ParseBlobUploadHandler.handle(ParseBlobUploadHandler.java:119) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doHandle(ContextHandler.java:1182) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.AppEngineWebAppContext.doHandle(AppEngineWebAppContext.java:187) at org.eclipse.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.doScope(ServletHandler.java:512) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.session.SessionHandler.doScope(SessionHandler.java:185) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ContextHandler.doScope(ContextHandler.java:1112) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.ScopedHandler.handle(ScopedHandler.java:141) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.AppVersionHandlerMap.handle(AppVersionHandlerMap.java:293) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:134) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.Server.handle(Server.java:539) at org.eclipse.jetty.server.HttpChannel.handle(HttpChannel.java:333) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.RpcConnection.handle(RpcConnection.java:213) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.RpcConnector.serviceRequest(RpcConnector.java:81) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.jetty9.JettyServletEngineAdapter.serviceRequest(JettyServletEngineAdapter.java:134) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.dispatchServletRequest(JavaRuntime.java:722) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.dispatchRequest(JavaRuntime.java:685) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$RequestRunnable.run(JavaRuntime.java:655) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.JavaRuntime$NullSandboxRequestRunnable.run(JavaRuntime.java:847) at com.google.apphosting.runtime.ThreadGroupPool$PoolEntry.run(ThreadGroupPool.java:270) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) Caused by: org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.api.UpgradeException: Failed to upgrade to websocket: Unexpected HTTP Response Status Code: 400 Bad Request at org.eclipse.jetty.websocket.client.WebSocketUpgradeRequest.onComplete(WebSocketUpgradeRequest.java:527) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.ResponseNotifier.notifyComplete(ResponseNotifier.java:196) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.ResponseNotifier.notifyComplete(ResponseNotifier.java:188) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.HttpReceiver.terminateResponse(HttpReceiver.java:441) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.HttpReceiver.responseSuccess(HttpReceiver.java:387) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.messageComplete(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:316) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.handleContentMessage(HttpParser.java:599) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseContent(HttpParser.java:1669) at org.eclipse.jetty.http.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:1517) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.parse(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:172) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.process(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:135) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpReceiverOverHTTP.receive(HttpReceiverOverHTTP.java:73) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpChannelOverHTTP.receive(HttpChannelOverHTTP.java:133) at org.eclipse.jetty.client.http.HttpConnectionOverHTTP.onFillable(HttpConnectionOverHTTP.java:155) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.AbstractConnection$ReadCallback.succeeded(AbstractConnection.java:305) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.FillInterest.fillable(FillInterest.java:103) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection$DecryptedEndPoint.onFillable(SslConnection.java:427) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection.onFillable(SslConnection.java:321) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ssl.SslConnection$2.succeeded(SslConnection.java:159) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.FillInterest.fillable(FillInterest.java:103) at org.eclipse.jetty.io.ChannelEndPoint$2.run(ChannelEndPoint.java:117) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.runTask(EatWhatYouKill.java:333) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.doProduce(EatWhatYouKill.java:310) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.tryProduce(EatWhatYouKill.java:168) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.strategy.EatWhatYouKill.run(EatWhatYouKill.java:126) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.ReservedThreadExecutor$ReservedThread.run(ReservedThreadExecutor.java:366) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:698) at org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$Runner.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:804) ... 1 more
I am wondering what "Websockets traffic is now subject to our SLA." --- Any suggestions would be appreciated.
ya...@google.com
Hi haimonti@gmail.com, could you fill an issue via https://cloud.google.com/support-hub/ with more details, i.e. your project ID, service, version, etc, so that we can investigate your case. Thanks.
to...@gmail.com
Everything seems to be working great with my deployment to GAE Nodejs Flex using NestJs as my server with socket.io....BUT only on desktop computers. It doesn't work when I try and connect via my iPhone's web browser (both Safari and Chrome). Even if I am using WIFI, it can't establish a connection. I get a ton of "Failed to load resource..." or "Websocket is closed before connection is established errors". If I look at my Stackdriver logging it appears that my instance stops and restarts haven't way through processing...I can see the string I hand to the websocket to initiate the conversation.
ya...@google.com
Hi tommyc38@gmail.com, could you fill an issue via https://cloud.google.com/support-hub/ with more details, thanks.
an...@gmail.com
Next week, this ticket will be 10 years old! Google, can you provide an update on the timeline for websockets on App Engine Standard?
an...@hawkfish.us
I'm trying to launch my app using bokeh. google provided example with Gunicorn by passing -k flask_socket.worker to enable web sockets. how would you do this for bokeh? thx in advance!
an...@gmail.com
Google, can you provide any updates about when websockets will be available on App Engine Standard?
br...@gmail.com
So ya know, google froze chrome updates this week so I'm doubtful we'll get
an answer about it any time soon. (Understandably)
Il giorno dom 29 mar 2020 alle 21:08 <buganizer-system@google.com> ha
scritto:
an answer about it any time soon. (Understandably)
Il giorno dom 29 mar 2020 alle 21:08 <buganizer-system@google.com> ha
scritto:
we...@google.com
kn...@google.com
mu...@gmail.com
Imagine picking up a 10 years old ticket.
an...@googlemail.com
is it possible to use a websocket using Django?
In the Doc there is only a solution for Flask as far as I can tell. Thanks!
In the Doc there is only a solution for Flask as far as I can tell. Thanks!
an...@gmail.com
Google, can you provide an update about any timeline for bringing websockets to App Engine Standard? The last update was a year and a half ago.
st...@google.com
While this Feature Request is about App Engine standard environment, we wanted to let you know that Cloud Run, another of our serverless compute products, now supportd WebSockets:
an...@gmail.com
Great to hear! Can you provide an updated timeline on when Appengine Standard will support websockets as well?
kn...@google.com
Hi, we still don't have a timeline for availability of websockets on App
Engine Standard. If you need websockets support for your application, I
recommend using Cloud Run or App Engine Flex.
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 9:18 AM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
Engine Standard. If you need websockets support for your application, I
recommend using Cloud Run or App Engine Flex.
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 9:18 AM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
ep...@gmail.com
Hello,
I am glad to hear that GCP has been supporting WebSockets on App Engine Flex. However, support for WebSockets on App Engine Standard is highly needed.
WebSockets are a very simple tool for developers, but requiring that they be deployed on App Engine Flex is rather frustrating. WebSockets are a very "standard" tool, and should not be withheld from App Engine Standard. App Engine Flex does not support scaling to 0, has a higher instance startup time, and features a longer deployment.
I would love to know when support for WebSockets will be available for App Engine Standard, especially considering this issue was first opened almost 12 years ago, and we haven't had an update in almost 9 months.
Thank you.
I am glad to hear that GCP has been supporting WebSockets on App Engine Flex. However, support for WebSockets on App Engine Standard is highly needed.
WebSockets are a very simple tool for developers, but requiring that they be deployed on App Engine Flex is rather frustrating. WebSockets are a very "standard" tool, and should not be withheld from App Engine Standard. App Engine Flex does not support scaling to 0, has a higher instance startup time, and features a longer deployment.
I would love to know when support for WebSockets will be available for App Engine Standard, especially considering this issue was first opened almost 12 years ago, and we haven't had an update in almost 9 months.
Thank you.
ga...@latinamericaforless.com
Any update on WebSockets on App Engine Standard?
ro...@gmail.com
Websockets on app engine flex don't even support wss just ws, which is useless as every browser complaints about mixed content. My nodejs has to output http as thats what is proxied by their nginx server but it also makes socket.io fall back to ws instead of wss. Current implementation is kind of useless.
an...@nodata.ltd
I would like to +1 #302 because its been a terrible experience for me moving over to flex...
I chose app engine because I didn't want to worry about the ins and outs of the environment, but I find myself battling with GCP and GAE daily now.
I chose app engine because I didn't want to worry about the ins and outs of the environment, but I find myself battling with GCP and GAE daily now.
bu...@gmail.com
13 years old issue and status still Assigned , I bet Assignee has been left Google.
ka...@gmail.com
Will probably be assigned to their next of kin soon.
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022, 1:55 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022, 1:55 PM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
la...@gmail.com
Why are you guys complaining on a 13 years old post like this isn't a thing?
I have had multiple apps deployed on GAE with websockets.
They do work, there's also some special features for it listed in the documentation, and it is great.
As for the mentioned ws vs wss, GAE is a containerized type solution, which means your encryption should live outside of it.
Please google the documentation and read it instead of googling a 13 years old issue.
https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/flexible/nodejs/using-websockets-and-session-affinity
I have had multiple apps deployed on GAE with websockets.
They do work, there's also some special features for it listed in the documentation, and it is great.
As for the mentioned ws vs wss, GAE is a containerized type solution, which means your encryption should live outside of it.
Please google the documentation and read it instead of googling a 13 years old issue.
jt...@linux-consulting.us
Your reference to documentation is for GAE Flex, not GAE Standard... The comments above mostly ask for its support in Standard; they don't want Flex.
But I agree that we should move on! There are so many other solutions. Years ago in my GAE Standard apps, I replaced my WebSocket needs with Firebase. Works very well!
The BIG Question:
Why are we using GAE anymore?
Cloud Run is replacing it and is much better! It isn't quite a lift-and-shift if you want to leverage all the new features, but it is worth it! You should NOT be building anything new on GAE!
GAE isn't even promoted as a product on cloud.google.com anymore (it's there but hard to find). Cloud Run is the future for this kind of stuff. I expect a long tail for GAE support, but it is long-in-the-tooth.
ma...@gmail.com
The big question isn't why are we using GAE Standard still, it's why is
Google still taking our money and claiming they are working on something
that is impossible to achieve.
On Sat, Sep 3, 2022, 10:35 AM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
Google still taking our money and claiming they are working on something
that is impossible to achieve.
On Sat, Sep 3, 2022, 10:35 AM <buganizer-system@google.com> wrote:
va...@google.com
su...@google.com
Hello,
Thank you for your continued patience and understanding regarding this feature request.
We'd like to share again that this functionality has been added to the
However, we understand that for many users the request is for the App Engine standard environment. While this feature hasn't been implemented there yet, we are evaluating the best way to make it available. We can't offer a timeline at this point, but please know that your feedback is important to us. It helps us prioritize enhancements that matter most to our users.
Description