How can we improve Azure Search?

Provide a startup-friendly billing model

For startups it might be interesting to split billing in 2: queries and storage (similar to the Windows Azure Storage billing model).
Our customer will have lots of records from day 1 (minimum 4 million), but the number of QPS will be very low the first weeks/months.

So we might want to start with a shared instance in terms of QPS, but not for data / # documents.

716 votes
Vote
Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: oidc
Signed in as (Sign out)
You have left! (?) (thinking…)
Sandrino Di Mattia shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

28 comments

Sign in
(thinking…)
Sign in with: oidc
Signed in as (Sign out)
Submitting...
  • Carlos Solano commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Same here. The gap between the free tier and the first billable unit is too large. Furthermore, as already posted, a better pricing scenario should be conceived for large document bases but low queries / sec

  • Noel Abrahams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    The search service is an extremely useful azure feature, but completely out of the question for a startup.

    We are looking to index around 2.5 million documents and the search rate initially is for around 100 users. As the user-base builds up, both the number of documents and the search rate will increase.

    The 100 users represent the beta testing group. We cannot get the site working with just 15,000 documents - that's just how it works.

    So, ideally we would like a pricing tier that matches this profile: A large number of documents, but low QPS - exactly as outlined by the OP.

  • Carl Cubillas commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I completely agree on this one. Also, please consider adding other shared and/or dedicated options. I believe this is the only service in Azure that has one plan other than free.

  • emed795 commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I strongly agree with this. Azure search needs a more realistic pricing model. If one wanted to use more than 3 indexes or have more than 10,000 docs we'd need to move to a standard search unit. The cost of 1 standard search unit would completely nuke 83% of our $150 BizSpark monetary cap on search ALONE. This makes it a complete nonstarter to consider just based on pricing. Especially considering that this pricing already reflects a 50% preview discount that goes away once the service hits general availability.

  • Ian Green commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    For a law office, documents can be vast in number at times due to pleading etc and the way Azure bills makes it rather expensive

    For a developer its also a nuisance with 75,000 files I recently fed to OneDrive and 48 hours later its still a problem syncing

  • Tom Hebert commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    We are creating a new app that will need to index about 17,000 small documents for search. The query level will be relatively low (three or four hundred per day) but it does need to be available 24x7. The low quotas for the free tier are understandable. It is obviously targeted at development. However, the gap in capacity and cost between the free and paid tier seems to be quite large.

    So here are the questions.

    Would document number 15,001 really cost us $3,000 per year?

  • Graham Wager commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Totally agree with this; we're currently building an application that while it will have quite a few documents it's going to be nowhere near the 15 Million/25GB limit for standard but might just creep above the "non-production" 10000/50MB limit for free.

    Once search goes live, we certainly couldn't justify paying £160/month for the feature so more refined scaling options would be great for smaller or non-proportional workloads.

2 Next →

Feedback and Knowledge Base