Please reconsider the new DB pricing tiers
Please reconsider the new DB pricing tiers. We have been using a 10 GB Business DB for almost 4 years and have been very happy with its performance. Last week we moved to the new Tiers since Web/Business will be deprecated in the future. We tried S1, S2 etc eventually we had to move to P2 to get the same level of performance.
That was over a 3X price increase for something we've been using for almost 4 years.
One more update here.
A couple of folks reach out after my last post, and I’d encourage everyone else that’s concerned or adding comments to do the same here.
For this update I did want to highlight a couple of 3rd part comments on Elastic Database Pools and their experience upgrading from Web/Business
It would be good to understand your scenario in more details. While we understand that a small subset of customers may be asked to pay more for their resource consumption, this isn’t the common use case.
For those of you who are facing large increases in your monthly bill as a result of moving from Web/Business (where we charge on DB size) to Basic/Standard/Premium single or elastic DBs I am always willing to listen to the specifics.
We do think the new service tiers, with their new features and predictable performance, offer great price performance for SQL databases in the cloud. We specifically made these changes as a result of customer feedback (that performance needed to be predictable)
I’d be happy to engage offline with more details. email@example.com
I would ask that you reach out to me rather than post here if you want a response.
bring back azure federations. you recommended to use it for years and now just wipe them away.
It seems that Microsoft don't understand that this update will be the end of azure. Only enterprises still use such an expensive product...
Bryan D commented
I cannot swallow the fact that, if you utilize all storage space in a P3 instance, you pay $7.44 (preview) per GB. Performance is surely expensive!
peter bannister commented
I too upgraded on the GA announcement, but wish I had read the background story first!
One of key DB was "upgraded" and the system died. We tracked it down to a specific area. to confirm our findings we did a simple select * from a view and our results were:
Web edition - 3 seconds
Standard S0 - 90 seconds
Standard S1 - 11 seconds
Standard S2 - 6 seconds
At this point I stopped and reverted back to Web.
It is looking like I need to upgrade to P1 or even P2, to get the same performance. This is a 20x cost base increase for us.
I am an Azure evangelist, but this is giving me real pause for thought.
If I could pool the DTU's over multiple databases, then I think that this could work for us but as it stands its a very painful cost to bear and may make some areas of our business uneconomic.
SQL Database has always been the worst service on Azure in my opinion. Now, it's slower and more expensive. Please fix this. Anything other than P2&P3 is unacceptable for me, and these tiers are very very expensive.
I was testing out the new tiers with my Lightswitch app which works well under the current Web tier. Tried out S2 and I can't even publish my app from within VS2013. To be fair, the publish I was testing with is making a significant number of changes to my DB, but this is practically a non-starter. Considering the price hike is approximately x6 times, I can't even get my application hosted onto Azure using Microsoft's own tools without shelling for a premium service...
We migrated to the new S2 tier over the weekend from Business, and quickly reversed the change. The move was a disaster, rending our site completely useless. To achieve the same performance that we're currently getting would require us to upgrade at least two of our databases to the P1 tier at minimum, resulting in a massive price increase from £44 to £600. We now have until Sept 2015 to find an alternative solution, unless MS review their price plans.
Greg Slater commented
This idea is similar - they could be combined: http://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/suggestions/6146769-reconsider-the-specs-of-preview-database-tiers
Guy Haycock at Microsoft added this comment to the idea above: "performance in Web/Business can be great, and up to P2 levels of performance"
So please don't ask us to pay £592 a month for this performance when you retire Web and Business! The reliability may be better, but I'd rather have to implement a retry strategy than pay nearly 200 times the price for the same performance level!
Eivind Tjore commented
Switched from business to S2 and the performance decrease was disastrous.
Queries (from entity framework) are running 10-100 times slower, rendering the site useless.
Please reconsider! What you are doing now is really gonna hurt your customers and in the end azure itself.
Elías Hdez commented
I switched too, and man, performance is a lot worse than the Web Edition, also, seems like is a lot expensive for very small Databases with low transactions.
Lajos Marton commented
I switched one of my test Web Edition db to Basic. It is catastrophic. It needs 43 sec to list a table with 418 rows :D As I see S1 level is the first, which can be enough for basic db jobs.
And I found a bug. The new tiers, not compatible with Visual Studio 2013 SQL Server Explorer and SSDT. If I want to compare SQL Schemas, or just use Table Designer, I got only an error message.
Pure crazyness, we would have to move to at least a P1 and probably a P2 for times when we run certain jobs and queries, which would equate to almost £600 per month for just one DB (less than 1GB) so an almost x100 cost increase for the same / similar performance. While we appreciate that the existing tiers were probably too cheap, the new tiers do not represent value or a compelling reason to;
1) Continue investing in moving applications to Azure
2) Continue using Azure SQL (with all its limitations and hurdles) or for that matter SQL server in this day and age when there are so many other robust and good quality RDS.
3) Not look at other Cloud / private cloud offerings (especially with current privacy and data security issues with MS cloud and other US companies).
This just feels like a step backward towards expensive SQL server licensing, basically Azure is no longer for startups or small SMEs.
K Thomas commented
I've been happily using web/business edition for several years, and yesterday I tried changing to basic/standard. But the switch didn't fare well--- DB actions were taking much longer than before, and timeouts occurred left and right. I could only get similar performance by going to premium, which is *much* more expensive than I'm paying now. I really was interested in the point-in-time backups, but the poor performance was made me switch back -- will be staying on web/business until these new tiers work better.
Peter Ennis commented
The new tiers are a disaster that has already happened. I confirmed all the issues below. Test compares 2 x XS app, 3 GB database vs. preview S1 and S2 and it was 50% slower. I did not even bother with P1 and P2 given the price/performance issues.
Lajos Marton commented
I have a 200mb active used database. This is 10$ per month now with a good performance Azure Web Edition Database.
Now if I want to get the same performance, even if my db size is very low (about 200mbyte), I have to pay for S2 100$ per month. I won't pay 10X price than now for a database.
I run a stored procedure once a day on web edition. The database size is 70MB.
But in new tier (Basic) it fails: Time out problem with connection.
To correct it I have to use S1 tier.
It means, to run only one stored procedure once a day I have to pay 8 TIMES MORE
(if I switch from web edition to standard S1 tier)
Why Microsoft wants Azure users to shift other database solution ?
The new price is not acceptable for us. But even worse, azure federations will be deprecated. Even the new premium tiers are too slow for us and we don't want to create our own sharding solution. That's mean we have to switch to Amazon RDS. It seems that Microsoft is working for their competitors, forcing the existing customers to switch and I cannot understand that.
I'm so disappointed about microsoft after they changed pricing for SQL Azure!
The new pricing seems lots benefit for heavy load database expecting more performance and database size, new tier the database size upper limit is not unlocked over than 150 GB which is not likely in Web and Business Tier and new tier has either reserved DTU guarantee.
In contrast, the light to medium traffic websites with database size less than 500 MB that we currently pay for it approx 5$ per db unit as in Web Tier. With the new tier, we have to pay 40$ in General Availability (20$ as 50% preview discount) for S1 to get the same performance. The running cost will be 8 times more expensive per database unit.
As our business nature, we use Azure as webfarm and currently host 50+ websites. When the sunset of Web Edition ,our monthly payment for db unit will be 2000$. (now is 250$) so we have to pay more 1750$ for nothing in current perspective
The new features are great and moving from a simple "pay per GB" model to one that is performance/predictability driven is the right move.
But the value proposition is unfortunately not acceptable.
We are paying around 20$ today for a Web/Edition database that is less than 5GB but runs some pretty complex queries.
It's been running fine and we are happy to pay more for the benefits offered by the new tiers.
But we would have to move to a P2 to keep the same level of performance and that would simply not be commercially viable anymore.
Azure is a fantastic platform and we've truly enjoyed our investment in it. But the price to performance offering for the new tier must change drastically. Today, we somewhat feel we are being hijacked by our early heavy commitment to the Azure platform in its early stages...
I can only hope more adjustments will be made...