LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  April 2008

CODE4LIB April 2008

Subject:

Re: Restricted access fo free covers from Google :)

From:

"Boheemen, Peter van" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:00:10 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (128 lines)

Hi Jonathan,

It is indeed working with the proxypass directive in Apache.
Now Google sees the Ip adres of the server and apparently, this does not create too much trafic. However, when it is busy the user might see the we're sorry page when they click on the link the API creates and travel through the NAT gateway. At least they can then enter the captcha and continue.
Today I have upscaled the service for books that do not have an ISBN. Google also accepts LCC and OCLC numbers as an id for books, but both numbers are not present in our catalog. All of our books are in Worldcat, so there must be a link. I have asked OCLC PICA (the dutch branch of OCLC) to provide me with a service that will return an OCLC number when I present it our national catalog number. They were very cooporative (http://webquery.blogspot.com/2008/03/hooray-for-oclc-pica-customer-response.html) and build this service (first they answered with a plain text return, but they altered this into a true XML service on my request) So now I call this service for the OCLC number and use this to invoke Google books API when and ISBN is missing from the catalog record. It works fine. I only find that Google's service is very slow. When I watch the response with firebug I see that the Google API takes about 10 - 20 times as much time (130 -250 msec) as the local parts of the page and twice as much as an Amazon book cover lookup. However, this is when it all goes well. Around mid day response slows down to 1,6 seconds and at some moments to over 30 seconds. Five minutes later response can be back to normal. I checked google.books.com at such a moment and it does not respond at all. I guess they have heavily underpowered Google books. Have you noticed this as well ?

Google got in touch with me about the problem and asked me where they could see the service. That won't help, since they will not pass our NAT gateway. However, I will contact them, also about the poor response. The way we have implemented it now our full record presentation performance is heavily influenced by the Google books response times.
I haven't had time to get back to them, because I have been busy organizing the yearly European Library Automation Group (ELAG) meeting which we will host next week. http://library.wur.nl/elag2008

I'll CC this message to the list, it ay be of use to others and I wonder how others experience the Google Books performance

Peter

Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen
Hoofd Applicatieontwikkeling en beheer - Bibliotheek Wageningen UR
Head of Application Development and Management - Wageningen University and Research Library
tel. +31 317 48 25 17                                                                                    http://library.wur.nl <http://library.wur.nl/>
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

________________________________

Van: Jonathan Rochkind [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Verzonden: di 8-4-2008 18:33
Aan: Boheemen, Peter van
Onderwerp: Re: [CODE4LIB] Restricted access fo free covers from Google :)



Hi Pete, I'd be interested in an update on this. Is your ProxyPass with
Apache to access Google Books search API still working well for you, and
not running into Google traffic limiters?    You haven't actually
communicated with Google on this to set up something special or
anything, have you?

I'm interested in trying a similar thing here.

Jonathan

Boheemen, Peter van wrote:
> I don't think I do anything sophisticated like X-forwarder-for. I just have a ProxyPass directive in the apache configuration teeling it to reverse proxy a directory to google
>
> ProxyPass /googlebooks http://books.google.com/books
>
> But what if Google did something with a X-forwarded-for header? It can not see where the actual user is located. Behind a NAT usually 10.0.0.0 adresses are used. In fact it is trivial what Ip adresses are used behind the NAT. Since they are not exposed to the outside world it is only relevant if they are unique within the network behind the NAT.
>
> Anyway, since we only hit google books form the server when a user asks for display of a full record, I hardly expect that will cause the Google triggers. I suspect that the few thousand PC's within the university campus hitting Google cause the problem, which especially Google books reacts upon. (I can still search Google when Google books rejects accces from my IP adress.)
> I'll keep you informed.
>
> Peter
>
>
> Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen
> Hoofd Applicatieontwikkeling en beheer - Bibliotheek Wageningen UR
> Head of Application Development and Management - Wageningen University and Research Library
> tel. +31 317 48 25 17                                                                                    http://library.wur.nl <http://library.wur.nl/>  <http://library.wur.nl/>
> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>
> ________________________________
>
> Van: Code for Libraries namens Jonathan Rochkind
> Verzonden: di 18-3-2008 18:48
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: [CODE4LIB] Restricted access fo free covers from Google :)
>
>
>
> Nice. X-Forwarded-For would also allow google to deliver availability
> information suitable for the actual location of the end-user.  If their
> software chooses to pay attention to this. Which is the objection to
> server-side API requests voiced to me by a Google person. (By proxying
> everything through the server, you are essentially doing what I wanted
> to do in the first place but Google told me they would not allow. Ironic
> if you have more luck with that then the actual client-side AJAXy
> requests that Google said they required!)
>
> Thanks for alerting us to X-forwarded-for, that's a good idea.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Joe Hourcle wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Wait, now ALL of your clients calls are coming from one single IP?
>>> Surely that will trigger Googles detectors, if the NAT did. Keep us
>>> updated though.
>>>
>> I don't know what Peter's exact implementation is, but they might relax
>> the limits when they see an 'X-Forwarded-For' header, or something
>> else to
>> suggest it's coming through a proxy.  It used to be pretty common when
>> writing rate limiting code to use X-Forwarded-For in place of
>> HTTP_ADDR so
>> you didn't accidentally ban groups behind proxies.  (of course, I don't
>> know if the X-Forwarded-For value is something that's not routable (in
>> 10/8), or the NAT IP, so it might still look like 1 IP address behind a
>> proxy)
>>
>> Also, by using a caching proxy (if the responses are cachable), the total
>> number of requests going to Google might be reduced.
>>
>> I would assume they'd need to have some consideration for proxies, as I
>> remember the days when AOL's proxy servers channeled all requests through
>> less than a dozen unique IP addresses.  (or at least, those were the only
>> ones hitting my servers)
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jonathan Rochkind
> Digital Services Software Engineer
> The Sheridan Libraries
> Johns Hopkins University
> 410.516.8886
> rochkind (at) jhu.edu
>
>

--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager