Archive storage in Azure
david rowson commented
For organisations currently in azure, keeping long term backups for regulatory purposes becomes very expensive, it seems obvious that offering a cold storage solution for older backups is the simple answer.
Each month the cost of backups increases, thus the wish for a solution becomes more of a requirement solely based on cost.
Is there a time line for this?
Stuart Cuthbertson commented
As of Sept 2019, I'm upvoting this specifically with regards to the "Backup for SQL Server on Azure VMs" service.
This backup service is very neat and a huge step forward in terms of ease of use.
BUT, it's a little hard to stomach having to pay $0.0224/GB/month to store large monthly backups we legally have to retain for 7 years (but have never yet needed to access) - when we know it's possible to pay just $0.00099/GB/month, less than one twentieth of the cost, to store data in regular Archive-tier block blobs.
Since the SQL Server VM backups are explicitly using block blob storage under the hood, it feels like this should be an option.
Robert Gross commented
Expand it to DPM recovery vaults
Our Trainer Team exceptionally structured schedule takes into account true needs and is ideal for tenderfoots and propelled level students. We have adaptable training timetables to suit individual needs. The training session should be possible in weekdays or ends of the week. Perfect for sprouting software engineers who need to set up their vocation in the field of information examination, this Python Training in Gurgaon gives constant training contextual investigation based projects that offer a down to earth understanding of the subject.
For More Info:- https://training-center-in-gurgaon.bitrix24.site/
I think your could have set this one as completed instead of closed.
The request was to have a colder storage tier with prices equal or lower to amazon Glacier.
As far as I’m concerned the new Archive tier which is available with prices like 0.002 per Gigabyte is answering that need.
It is even actually exceeding it as it provide the convenience of the rich blob storage api where Glacier is a complete different Api compared to S3.
Hope this will help people which might be confused by this status update.
Thank you for reaching out! Due to multiple threads referring to similar suggestions, we have merged them into one. Votes received on all previously existing ideas regarding archive storage shall not be disregarded and will continue to be used for prioritization.
What is the deal? The previous topic called "Amazon Glacier" with 222 votes was closed and this one opened. Please add 222 votes to this one.
And btw comparing cold storage and glacier is a bit unfair since cold storage offers the exact same API as hot storage which is way more convenient than Glacier's vaults.
Yes we definitely need a colder, cheaper tier to azure storage, which would allow cheap long term retention of data (in an agnostic way as storage does).
Glacier is currently 7 euro per To/Month, it is not clear from tarification but it seems it is LRS storage. Azure LRS Cold storage is 8.4 euro per To/Month. This is not a huge difference but it can matter.
Where Azure could make a big difference with a colder tier would be with GRS cold storage is currently 16.9 euros / To / Month and this is quite prohibitive. I think there might be interesting technical solutions to provide extremely resilient cold storage for a cheaper price (with increased data retrieval costs I guess).
You can use Azure cold storage or not?
Javier - commented
I tink that Davi got it. One thing is a backup service and another one is a data retention service. I need to store some data for very long periods (ie: years for legal purposes). Digital signatures, contracts, scanned documents, ...)
you should be able to select a second tier, tier one is the current backup solution. Tier two a slower with the cooled down storage, and with a low storage price (or not the costs per 50Gb). We currently use a backup solution with a price of 0,05 per GB a month. It has more features (SQL backup, file/folder backup, vm backup, exchange brick level backup and a very good block upload method). It's a bit difficult to move that solution to azure as the costs for backup would quadruple or more.
Google Nearline is also very similar to Glacier - with the same super low cost and data recovery within seconds instead of hours.
Johan Eliasson commented
Davi, spot on!
Davi Cavalheiro commented
Although the two solutions do not have perfectly identical characteristics, the basic principle is similar.
I'm not saying that the price of Azure Backup should be the same as Amazon Glacier, since as you said yourself they are different products.
But Microsoft could create a new product for Azure family , which is similar to Amazon Glacier.
I work for some companies that use many Microsoft Azure services, including the Azure Backup, but when they need a solution to archive old information to historical records, the Amazon Glacier is the one with the best cost benefit. I believe that many other companies have similar needs.
I wish Microsoft had a service like this, because I prefer to work with Microsoft instead of the Amazon, and I think there are others who think so too.
Davi Cavalheiro commented
Microsoft needs to offer a service similar to Amazon Glacier.
With the same low prices for storing backups.
And add the advantage of integration with Windows Backup.
Amazon Glacier is a secure, durable, and extremely low-cost storage service for data archiving and online backup. Customers can reliably store large or small amounts of data for as little as $0.01 per gigabyte per month, a significant savings compared to on-premises solutions. To keep costs low, Amazon Glacier is optimized for infrequently accessed data where a retrieval time of several hours is suitable.