How can we improve Azure Storage?

← Storage

Offer Premium Storage option for Azure File Service

Offer Premium Storage for high I/O databases and applications when provisioning File Services

104 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    Forgot password?
    Create a password
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Close
    Close
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Alan shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    9 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      Forgot password?
      Create a password
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Close
      Close
      Submitting...
      • naoto saito commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please hurry up. I "REALLY" want to use premium storage for file service since 2016.
        If you can't, I'm going to move to AWS or GCP.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        this is very important feature. In our scenario the Azure File API is used to keep up to date a drive of data, which serves as the base for several FTP servers. The solution works great, but the throughput of HDD is becoming a bottleneck.

      • Barenya kumar padhi commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I am transfering data from vm to files share of storage account with standard and LRS conifiguration but it has very slow meand only 1mb speed

      • PRISMA Computer GmbH commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Since Azures SMB implementation is only an overlay over the blob storage (a Microsoft employee wrote that somewhere in a blog) I can't understand why I makes generally a difference whether normal our premium storage is used...

      • Lucian Daia commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Although Azure files looked great when it was first released, it's seriously lagging behind Amazon EFS today. It's not even close in terms of latency, throughput and scalability.
        Not sure how popular the service is, but from our experience it's one of the most important services used by customers.

        So here's a small comparison to maybe help prioritize this particular request a bit higher:
        - Azure Files uses SMB (available natively on both Windows and Linux), can scale up to 5 TB in storage and delivers 1000 IOPS @ 8KB (~8 MB/sec)
        - AWS EFS uses NFS (lower latency, but only available natively on Linux), can scale to a few petabytes and delivers at least 100 MB/sec, but can go up to over 1 GB/sec.

        If I was a company looking into migrating a file-share dependent workload into the cloud, making a choice between these two would be quite easy.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This feature would be really useful to us.
        We host web farms and apps on VMs within a RG.
        We are currently using Web Deploy to keep the Web and App content in "near real time"sync thus avoiding DFS and it's associated costs and overheads in both time to administer and VMs. If we had Premium Storage we could centralise the files and use existing MS technologies, like shared Config for IIS. This would remove the need for syncing and offer improved reliability. We already have it set up and it works, but due the transaction end to end time it's just too slow and we cannot offer it to our customers.

      • Jascha Schmidt commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please prioritize this request to improve the following Performance issues:

        - high read and write latency
        - the extracting of zip archives on the fileshare is very slow
        - file download via HTTP and HTTPS requests is very slow

      Storage: Files

      Feedback and Knowledge Base

      (thinking…)
      Hosted by UserVoice