Azure Functions

Azure Functions is an event driven, compute-on-demand experience that extends the existing Azure application platform with capabilities to implement code triggered by events occurring in other Azure services, SaaS products, and on-premises systems. With Azure Functions, your applications scale based on demand and you pay only for the resources you consume. Azure Functions provides an intuitive, browser-based user interface allowing you to create scheduled or triggered pieces of code implemented in a variety of programming languages.

How can we improve Microsoft Azure Functions?

(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. 30 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    7 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    I’m closing this since we won’t be able to add this to our consumption plan.

    Multi-tenant instances like consumption app service plan can’t be joined to a vnet since this would effectively give access to this vnet to all apps co-located in that instance.

    The best option to work around this is to use hybrid connections.

    -Colby and Byron

  2. Allow always on mode on the consumtion plan

    We have an issue where the cold start of functions on the consumption plan takes too long: https://github.com/azure/azure-webjobs-sdk-script/issues/838

    The solution seems to be to enable the always on setting only available on the app service plan: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-scale

    Changing function to run on the app service plan pricing tier seems to negate the benefit of using a server-less architecture as dedicated VMs will be used and therefore the cost will be much higher.

    8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    There are other items that track performance improvements, which seems to align better with the stated problem. Per the linked GitHub issue, the cold start is getting reduced to somewhere around 2 seconds with a current set of updates, and the team is continuing to make performance commitments.

    This solution proposal around AlwaysOn is not philosophically aligned with the goals of the consumption plan, though. The consumption plan is about only having capacity provisioned, and therefore only paying for what you use, based on the incoming events. AlwaysOn says that there should be standing capacity for my site, even if there are no events, and is therefore itself not a serverless setting.

    Our goal is to make the consumption plan appear to always be on, so we will continue to work on improving the cold start performance.

    - Matthew

  3. Sequential Processing of Storage Queues

    Storage Queues are a great low cost option for queuing work, but sometimes that work needs to be done in sequence. Client senders might even distribute messages across multiple queues sending messages to the right queue to maintain sequential processing logic while still scaling. Functions are a great way to process those messages and together create a true on-demand cost model.

    However, functions can't support this use case due to the inability to restrict the function to process messages from a single queue in sequence instead of in parallel.

    Similar behavior can be achieved with higher cost services such as…

    7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. First-class support for Azure Classic Storage

    Now Azure Functions only supports for ARM storages in the same region.
    If we want to specify the classic storage, we have to set its connections string to App Settings.
    It would be much useful if Azure Portal show the classic storages to pick up Azure Functions trigger.

    7 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    After further investigation, we do not plan to support this feature, since Functions supports only Azure Resource Manager resources for automation and integration. Classic Storage accounts can already be used by specifying them in App Settings, but we have no plans to add them to the UI in the portal.

  5. Provide "key" authorization for prxies like for functions (function key, host key, master key)

    The same authorization levels / key mechanisms should be available for proxies like they are available for functions already. Or they exist and I simply could not find them ?

    6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Proxies  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. Dynamic {queueTrigger} token for blob input/output bindings

    Treat the {queueTrigger} token as an object so the properties can be accessed in blob input/output bindings in case the queue message itself is an object.

    Furthermore, it would be helpful if the {queueTrigger} token would match the names property value of the queue binding to improve readability.

    See the following function.json:

    {
    "bindings": [
    {
    "name": "invoice",
    "type": "serviceBusTrigger",
    "direction": "in",
    "topicName": "input",
    "subscriptionName": "output",
    "connection": "input-listen",
    "accessRights": "Listen"
    },
    {
    "name": "details",
    "type": "blob",
    "direction": "in",
    "path": "invoices/{invoice.id}.json",
    "connection": "connection-string"
    }
    ],
    "disabled": false
    }

    6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  7. allow azure websites and azure functions to be proxied through the same URL - reverse proxy functionality as PAAS

    allow multiple appservices (azure websites, azure functions) to be proxied using the same URL without requiring the creation of a reverse proxy:
    example
    https://mywebsites.com/ --> https://mywebsite.azurewebsites.net
    https://mywebsites.com/api/api1 --> azure function 1
    https://mywebsites.com/api/api2 --> azure function 2

    5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Proxies  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  8. Outbound IP

    Add solution for fixed outbound IP in AppServicePlan Standard. Serverless functions should be able to do work securely, this includes secure connecting to a Azure SQL database. Perhaps add Azure Sql as a service endpoint? The point to site, gateway, vnet etc solution doesn't cut it.

    5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. Process isolation within the same Function App

    It would be beneficial to be able to run multiple functions from different Function App Projects in the same Azure Function App. Why? For simplicity purposes. It would be unmanageable to create so many Azure Functional Apps for each function when they don't really belong in the same project. Versioning of external references is one reason to have isolation.

    Since you are already hosted in Azure App Service, you could leverage Virtual Directories as a mechanism for Isolation.

    More details here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47705029/can-we-have-two-separate-bin-folders-within-a-single-function-app

    5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. Multiple Targets for Function App Proxies

    It looks like proxies can forward a request to one destination. It would be nice if they same request could be forwarded to multiple destinations.

    Our use case is we have the same web app running in multiple regions. We need to post a message to each of them that a particular cache item is invalid. I know there are other patterns for this, but this seems like an elegant way. Feedback welcome.

    5 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Proxies  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  11. Visual Studio extension for Azure functions should not be mutually exclusive with the Azure portal

    It seems that when an Azure function is created in Visual Studio, it can't be modified in the Azure portal. Also, several features seem to be missing from Visual Studio (for example, where is the equivalent to the "Integrate" tab?).

    It should be possible to:
    - Create an Azure function in the Azure portal and import it as a project in Visual Studio
    - Start an Azure function in Visual Studio, deploy it, then make additional modifications on the Azure portal, for features that are not yet available in Visual Studio (for example using the "Integrate" tab)

    Eventually, everything that…

    4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    I don’t believe we’ll ever fully duplicate all functionality in the Azure Portal in Visual Studio for the simple reason that they’re two tools focused on different things – VS is for development, and the portal is mostly for management and monitoring. We do plan to gradually enable more and more overlap between the two tools, but I’m declining this since we’ll never make the two equivalent.

  12. Make LogicApps an additional "language" for Azure Functions implementations

    Azure Functions support a variety of implementations...JavaScript, Java, C#, etc. An Azure LogicApp should be a possible implementation / language of an Azure Function, its code is the LogicApp JSON definition, it (the JSON) could be deployed from a Git like all Azure Functions, it could support Deployment Slots in Azure Functions, Hybrid connections to on-premise APIs, it SHOULD support the Azure Function Runtime for on-premise deployment of LogicApps-FUnctions, etc., a seemless integration between Functions and LogicApps...

    4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    I assume main motivation is desire to host a logic app workflow in the functions runtime. Unfortunately logic apps runtime today is dependent on a number of capabilities that don’t exist in functions runtime. However there are many opportunities for tighter integration. In the last few months we added a “Logic app” menu item in the Function App Settings to manage logic apps from function.

    Closing this for now but feel free to re-open specific items pointed to integration improvements, or on the Logic Apps uservoice for things like on-prem runtime.

  13. Match subscription selection with rest of Portal blades

    Why doesn't the subscription selection of the new Function App blade match the existing blades, e.g. Logic Apps, Resource Group, etc.

    In all those blades, I can set my subscription and the selection follows me as I change services ...

    BUT the function app blade has it's own way of doing it ... and worse it's totally unrelated to the other blades, so I'm in resource group, select just our dev subscription. Switch to Logic App, and see just our dev logic apps, switch to Function App ... and I'm looking at the last subscription I set it to whatever…

    4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Portal  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Unfortunately, this is not possible due to the implementation of the Azure Functions experience. It is an iFrame within the rest of the portal, and we don’t reuse the same controls as the rest of the portal for subscription selection.

    -Donna Malayeri
    Program Manager, Azure Functions

  14. Merge with WebJobs

    Having two products that are so closely intertwined, yet named differently, is confusing. Both run in a App Service. Both have bindings and triggers. Functions run in both serverless and tiered planes. The biggest difference I've found so far is that I program WebJobs in standard C# and Functions in C# scripting (.csx), but that's just a technical detail, much like you can write Functions in various languages. Personally, I prefer the name Azure Functions as it suggests broader use scenarios.

    4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We understand the feedback and indeed the product names are fairly different while they share the common infrastructure. There would be a lot of impact to the current customer base of Webjobs to go through a renaming or product alignment change. New Functions customers tend to not be confused by this as they jump into Functions directly. Regardless we published this doc to make the differences clear: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-compare-logic-apps-ms-flow-webjobs#compare-functions-and-webjobs

    thanks
    — Eduardo

  15. Provide access to Message properties for output Service Bus bindings

    For async Functions, out parameters are not permitted, which limits us to ICollector<T> or IAsyncCollector<T> output bindings. There is no way to set Message properties such as MessageId or CorrelationId.

    I suggest new collection types specifically containing Message objects, or perhaps even allow ICollector<Message> and IAsyncCollector<Message> with logic to prevent double-serialization (putting the Function-created Message into a Collector-created Message, which is what I assume would happen if I tried that today).

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  16. VS 2017 Azure function for powershell.

    Currently I don't see any powershell support within VS 2017 for developing azure function. Any idea when this would occur?

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Support of the Route Constraints in the proxy template route

    It would be useful to support route constrains in the proxy template route in order to allow filtering routes by using regex.

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Proxies  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    This functionality is supported in Azure APIM, and we would suggest using that offering if you need full regex matching in routes. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/api-management/api-management-policy-expressions

    In Proxies we support route variables, which will perform wildcard matching around your variable rules. You can then run a regex match on the resultant data inside of a Function. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-functions/functions-proxies#modify-requests-responses

    Thanks for the feedback!
    Alex
    Azure Functions Team

  18. Support output integrations for all languages supported by Azure Functions

    The Azure portal lets me define an output integration (for example to write to Azure Table Storage) for any functions, regardless of the language in which they were developed. However, I can't find in the documentation how this output should be generated for most languages (only C# and JavaScript). It should be supported for all languages (for example PowerShell)

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. FTP Triggers

    Could you please create FTP Triggers such as the ones existing in Logic Apps?

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  20. MSI Linux

    It appears you can set MSI in the portal but using the CLI you can clearly see this is a bug in our code as the container size being passed is 0:
    msrest.http_logger : {"kind": "functionapp,linux", "location": "East US", "properties": {"enabled": true, "hostNameSslStates": [{"name": "jsanderslinixfx.azurewebsites.net", "sslState": "Disabled", "hostType": "Standard"}], "serverFarmId": "/subscriptions/da709071-45fd-474b-85fe-145cd5db6e64/resourceGroups/jsanderslinixfx/providers/Microsoft.Web/serverfarms/EastUSLinuxDynamicPlan", "reserved": true, "isXenon": false, "hyperV": false, "scmSiteAlsoStopped": false, "clientAffinityEnabled": false, "clientCertEnabled": false, "hostNamesDisabled": false, "containerSize": 0, "dailyMemoryTimeQuota": 0, "httpsOnly": false}, "identity": {"type": "SystemAssigned"}}

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
← Previous 1 3 4
  • Don't see your idea?

Azure Functions

Feedback and Knowledge Base