Run Google App Engine Apps On Amazon's Cloud 39
jamie found a post laying to rest one potential criticism of Google's App Engine, that of the danger of lock-in to the platform. Waxy.org points out a hack called AppDrop, written by Chris Anderson, that provides a container for Google App SDK applications, running entirely on Amazon's EC2 infrastructure. Here's Anderson's AppDrop page and his blog post announcing it.
Re:Agent Smith (Score:4, Funny)
Queue (Score:3, Funny)
-Peter
PS: Remember, there's no "I don't get it." moderation option.
Re: (Score:1)
Took me a while...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
In my case, I _was_ that kid.
It's 'Cue' not 'Queue' (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Miles better than wrinkly old rubberlips :P
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
CF
Re: (Score:2)
amazon adds permanent storage functionality to EC2 (Score:5, Informative)
http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2008/04/block-to-the-fu.html [typepad.com]
Re:amazon adds permanent storage functionality to (Score:2)
Re:amazon adds permanent storage functionality to (Score:2)
Since Google likes to implement Star Chambers (Score:2)
Oh, wait...
+1 invevitable (Score:2, Insightful)
Yet another pulled punch from Google. I think everyone realizes it isn't infallible now. But we're all too damn afraid to say it because of what would happen when the collective ego stroking ends. If we all started hating Google, its employees would have to find new ways to attai
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not even close (Score:4, Insightful)
Unlike google, they don't really have any technology to scale. ec2 does not count of course, because I doubt their app sdk scales.
Anyone can run the google sdk on their machine. you can download it straight from google.
Google's main lock in is that they run a scalable service that no one, not even amazon, is coming close to.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Not even close (Score:5, Informative)
?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Obligatory (Score:3, Funny)
Interesting... (Score:5, Interesting)
App Engines will not, however, be able to run EC2. (Kind of obvious, if you know anything about either of them.)
However, I think you lose the main benefit of using App Engines if you put them on EC2 -- that being that Google gets to worry about scaling. With EC2, you have to do everything yourself, including detecting load and deciding whether or not to fire up another instance. With App Engines, you just upload your app and watch it go, unless I'm misunderstanding something. Put App Engines on EC2, and you suddenly have to build an infrastructure to support it.
So it's nice to know your app is portable, at least, but I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting this, other than as a way to keep Google on their toes -- if Google really does start to be evil, this is a nice way to port away from them.
Google App Engine Virtual Appliance (Score:3, Informative)
Does this service provide BigTable? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Google AppEngine's Datastore API seems (currently) less featurific than Amazon's (also highly scalable) SDB, and could probably be implemented easily on top of SDB if you really wanted too -- or you could just use SDB from an AppEngine application running on EC2 (or, for that matter, running on Google's servers) and get the additional functionalit
10 years ago... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only would this sentence have been incomprehensible 10 years ago, but almost every single word in it would have been as well!
These aren't boring times, people.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
doesn't remove lock-in (Score:4, Interesting)
What is needed is either an open source implementation, or for Google to release the runtime in open source form.
was there lock-in to begin with? (Score:1)
From there, one can choose to use the APIs they provide to their persistence layers and other services -- or not.
Assuming one can abstract out the implementation details of those APIs in their application's framework, then it should be possible to make the application code portable. Extracting the data means you'll have to write a quick script to back it all up -- which one would be doing