Azure CosmosDB is too expensive for small but multiple collections
Currently using on-prem MongoDB (on Linux) and wish to move to Azure, but I find CosmosDB is too expensive for small but multiple (MongoDB)collections because it seems that a minimum of 400 RRU's/per second will be charged for each collection.
The terminology used on the pricing web pages is somewhat unclear though and I am not sure if the pricing for the minimum of 400 RRU's/second applies to partitions or collection (or if these terms are in fact identical semantically)
Cosmos DB supports sharing throughput across multiple collections with database-level throughput. This costs approximately $24/month.
Thank you for your feedback on this item. Will be closing this item at this time.
Great news! This makes so much more sense than price things per collection.
Tried creating new database using Mongo API with 400 RU Limit. When trying to insert record, I get "Shared throughput collection should have a partition key". The collection doesn't exist yet, but it should create. I am using Mongoose, and set the ShardKey option, but still doesn't allow creating. If I create the collection first, then I can insertOne via MongoDB Shell, but not via Mongoose.
@Dominic, The new minimum level for databases is 400 RU/s. It is no longer 10,000 RU/s.
Hold on! I think you're using "Combined with..." incorrectly.
If you choose to provision at a database level (sharing throughput across all collections) the minimum RUs is 10,000! That's $19.20 a day!
This does not help the use cases of hobby projects or low income projects using software that creates a lot of collections.
Thank you for listening! This finally brings the base price of CosmosDB to around the same as for SQL Server and Postgres, making it viable for any project.
Finally something that helps! Thanks a lot for this change!
Joshua Lloyd commented
This is exceptional, thanks Azure Cosmos DB Team! 400RU/s per database is exactly what we needed.
Nathan Becker commented
This adjustment is just what we needed - thank you!
Alan M commented
Why can't you lower the minimum RU/s to something like 25 or 50?
Jose Duran commented
Sorry, too late. I move my apps to mongoDB cloud .
And no plan to back.
Jason Soden commented
Thank you for the update. 400 RU/s database for $23/mo is a huge step in the right direction.
I agree the pricing is truly ridiculous. I thought I would try to run an open source ecommerce project GrandNode that uses MongoDB with 118 collections, only to find the cost would be equivalent to the mortgage on my house.
John Doe commented
The pricing is really ridiculous. To say I was surprised to see that I've lost 100+USD in a week for only 4 small MongoDB tables is to say nothing. I was shocked. It's way too expensive, guys. I've calculated everything and decided it would be much cheaper to rent a dedicated server with 32 GB of ram and a powerful CPU which I can use virtually for any purpose and, of course, install mongo with tons of tables without any additional price. I have a demo account on Azure right now, but if pricing policy remains the same I will definitely not pay for it and just switch to another service provider. Please, review your pricing policy. It's too expensive for small projects
When working on a NoSQL environment, One Collection ( Table) could/should be enough for the whole app. This applies to MongoDB and DynamoDB as well. Coming from MySQL , we must rethink how we model the data. Honestly It’s actually easier on NoSQL. We must ‘unlearn what we have learn’ from MySQL
Dwarakanathan Thirugnanasambandam commented
Why does cosmos DB offer only 2MB per document? Thats going to keep people away from choosing cosmos DB.
Rick Stephens commented
@Admin Thanks for starting this, and we should be thankful for the freebies. The response seems a bit tone deaf though. The whole complaint here is that a single collection is a minimum of 400 RUs! So my response to the free RU's is BFD. That's what everyone is complaining about. That's like charging by the table for SQL Server and making the minimum monthly cost for each table $23. That's absurd pricing and I can't believe that pricing model made it to production. Pricing for this needs to be per database and not cost $584 per month! Not only is the use case of lots of small collections a problem, so is the small number and small tables. Who wants to pay $100 a month for 4 collections?
Tom Tucker commented
As we have come to know when a CosmosDB team member says "soon" that could mean years. I hope your soon really means less than 3 months.
Jason Soden commented
Thanks for the update.
As you're aware, the free trials are great for new users but don't solve the long-term billing problem for the "small but many" use cases (Dev/Test environments, experiments, hobby apps, indy startups, etc). My free subscription ended a long time ago :(
However, I'm glad to hear you're actively working on the pain points we're experiencing. It's such a big issue for many devs and small businesses that I'm confident a resolution will happen eventually.
So, your latest update also doesn't help, and honestly is a bit patronising. Free access for a year? Great, but then I'm on the hook for at least $580/month!
Rather than trying to trick people into ending up with enormous bills when their trial expires, how about dropping the ludicrous per-collection pricing model, and *drastically* reducing the minimum RUs - *that* would lead to a massive uptake in usage.
Petteri L commented
Im working in a decent sized organization and i've been trying to sell to my team leaders the idea of using CostmosDb with azure functions. The cost however is killing it. I can not find a way to justify to them spending almost $600/month for a database, no matter how good your (and my) marketing of it is.
So the direction is right, from 50kRUs to 10kRUs ( ~$3000 to ~$600 per month ). But you seriously need lower tiers as well, 10kRUs is **** of a lot of usage! How about pricing it per 1kRUs/m where you could scale up as you need to grow?
The cost/collection is another level of stupid. Why would i tie myself to a system where always when i need another "table" i know it's gonna add another ~$30 to the bill - no matter how low the usage is.?. Come on Microsoft! I have to to make the architecture call soon and i really like the idea of CosmosDb. Just dont ruin it with greed! Especially since the rest of the Azure services and MS licenses are not exactly cheap to begin with.