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.
Agreeing with the choir that the changes do not address the concerns presented here. 10k RUs is fine and well for a small- to medium-sized enterprise-level app, but the folks here (myself included) are talking about users in the dozens or hundreds, not in the tens of thousands or more. Our user bases don't generate enough traffic to warrant 400 RUs total, let alone 400 RUs per collection.
And from Microsoft's side, what happens when some of our small apps scale up? We who have jumped ship due to high Cosmos cost aren't going to come back; we'll stick with what got us our growth, be it MongoAtlas or another service. By poo-pooing away the small fish you drastically reduce your chance of one day having big fish. Putting out false-hope updates like this one ("minimums reduced! Too bad it doesn't matter one fig to everyone asking for the reductions in the first place!") does not help the situation.
Cosmos is a great service going to waste due to the cost barriers. I look forward to an elastic price model in the ideal world, doing away with minimums entirely in a good world, or [grumpily] settling for reasonable minimums (10 RUs per collection, for instance) in a tolerable world.
Josep Planells commented
Definitely, It's not a valid pricing model for low usage, not critical MongoDB databases with many collections. $584 per month is too much for many scenarios like this one. Switching to Cosmos remain impossible.
10K minimum = $0.8 * 730 hours = $584 per month !!! We are freelance, individuals, developers that are looking to learn Cosmos, or even small businesses ! We need some "autoscaling" based on real usage... at least it is a scheme for developers that want to learn Cosmos ! (How can I learn it at home , the emulator is not enough !!!)
Joshua Lloyd commented
Was happy to see Database level pricing rolled out, but at 10K RU minimum, I think you missed the entire point of what was being requested. We are small businesses and independent developers. 10K RU is unacceptable. Why can you not price it by resource utilization like any other cloud service? Please bring down the minimum RU of Database level pricing and charge based on utilization. Encourage the adoption of your platform, don't barricade it behind prohibitive price minimums.
Tom Tucker commented
I am noticing a term change that is pricing per container instead of pricing per collection.
Are multiple collections per a single container coming? I still dont see any reference to container instead of collection pricing in the portal.
Jason Jensen commented
When I saw announcement of changes I was hopeful, but the changes are not enough. Please consider lowering the minimum RU/s for database level throughput to 400 or less and the minimum RU/s for collections to 10 or less.
Jason Soden commented
I appreciate the work you're doing on improving the pricing model but this doesn't help individuals at all. The pricing you're referring to is organization-specific.
I'd gladly pay $10/mo for 100 RU's per database so my total bill for Dev, Test, and Prod doesn't exceed $30/mo. Until then, Cosmos DB just isn't accessible to solo developers and small teams. We're stuck using Table Storage and other data stores.
Regarding your pricing update - unless I'm mistaken, 10K RUs still costs $585 per month!
And for per-collection pricing (which, BTW, is a pricing model that makes *no sense*!), the minimum is still 400RUs!
I don't like to be overly negative, but honestly, the paltry price changes you've made will make no difference whatsoever to uptake of CosmosDB for smaller apps/systems/businesses.
To late just moved to firebase
I'm moving to mongodb atlas because this is just too expensive
Adding my support for a PAYG model, or at least a much lower RU minimum
I got an invoice of $4000 for a month, because I'm a newbie and I created 3 collections, with the default parameters. There are 4 or 5 documents only (few KB) ! I just didn't know how it work... and what a terrible surprise ! I'm still dealing with the support for this... lets see what will happend !
Do you think it is normal ? You are killing us, and it should kill your own business ! I don't understand why it work that way !
The pricing model should be based on real resources usage, it should be automatic and dynamic !
It should depends of the disk usage, computer usage, network usage etc..
The current pricing is a complete non-sense !
From a developer point of view it is too complex to understand, and even impossible to handle !
Just signed up for the free trial, love the service, then I dig into the minimum RUs and realize that our small POC app is going to cost us 3 digits a month just for the DB hosting. We'd probably average 1-5 RU/s, yet we'd be forced to pay for 400 RU/s per collection? Are you kidding me?
Switching to another service; this is highway robbery. No reason Cosmos can't be PAYG.
Andrew Jocelyn commented
Get rid of per collection pricing and bring down the min per DB pricing to 400 RU.
Jason Soden commented
The Cosmos DB pricing model is unacceptable. Who thought it was a good idea to charge $23+ per collection? It's extremely expensive for small apps, experiments, and minimum viable products.
Dan Gander commented
cost on the service is insane. we moved one document type into a collection in Cosmos and our total monthly azure costs doubled in one hit, thanks to needing QA, UAT and LIVE (blue+green)collections.
There needs to be a proper PAYG pricing just like every other data store service in Azure.
Given the cost hit we've just taken, I'll probably have to move us off Cosmos and onto table storage.
It's a shame, becuase Cosmos is a great service offering, but way too cost prohibitive.
Adam Pooler commented
Please introduce a proper PAYG pricing model. I would love to be able to set min and max RRU settings with no restriction on either and then just pay for what we actually use. The pricing model at the moment is, as a lot of people have already said, a barrier to using CosmosDB which is a real shame as it's a great service.
Nick Chapsas commented
You can actually use Cosmonaut's Collection Sharing feature which will allow you to seamlessly have document types sharing collections without losing any CRUD capabilities. You can read more about that here https://github.com/Elfocrash/Cosmonaut#collection-sharing
Justin Stuparitz commented
Would like to see the limit lowered to 100 RU/s. This is cost prohibitive for non-prod env's (dev, qa, uat etc)
Please do something, at least let us set database-level RU to 1,000. That will make Cosmos DB unbeatable!