Chris Kirby
My feedback
-
5,484 votes
Work on this feature has started. Will update here when this becomes generally available.
Thank you for your suggestion and votes.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,157 votes
Hey Folks,
We have made some great progress on this idea and most of our services today do support move resources across groups.
We are still working towards 100% support and while we do that it would be great if you can help us prioritize the missing services.
Please file individual asks on each service category present in uservoice and vote for it.
Thanks,
Azure Portal TeamChris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
932 votes
A common need for users of Azure Table Storage is searching data in a Table using query patterns other than those that Table Storage provides efficiently, namely key lookups and partition scans. Using Azure Search, you can index and search Table Storage data (using full text search, filters, facets, custom scoring, etc.) and capture incremental changes in the data on a schedule, all without writing any code. To learn more, check out Indexing Azure Table Storage with Azure Search: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/search/search-howto-indexing-azure-tables
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
231 votes
We are more focused around data synchronization than schema synchronization at the moment. We may revisit the priority of this in the future.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Kirby
commented
data sync is certainly more important, but this should be high on the list imo. When you have 3 or 4 db's in a sync group, its very difficult to get a change propagated successfully...especially if you are modifying existing tables/columns in a schema.
My current method of doing this is to first disable sync on all of the schema entities that my deployment script will be modifying and let that propagate. Second, i then deploy from my db project to all db's in my sync group. Third, i refresh the schema from the hub in the sync group settings and re-enable sync on all the new and changed entities. Finally save and hope for success... which happens more often than not.
My ideal scenario is to simply deploy my changes to the hub and have it be responsible for automating the propagation and failure rollbacks. It would also automatically sync all new entities, or perhaps provide a setting in the sync group to set those types of defaults.
Thanks for the great work on this service!
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
20 votes
We hear you. This is a fairly common request and we will try to do better.
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Kirby
commented
very happy to hear this is under review...by far my biggest pain point is when i see a generic error message with a guid for reference. I need to know whats wrong quickly, as i'm sure many of us do. I know its preview, but its such a critical production tool for our hybrid infrastructure that we already rely on it for a few apps.
-
103 votes
This is a very interesting idea! We would like to know what specific usage you have in mind – for example, are you continuously generating operational logs on-prem and would like an utility to easily upload these files into blob storage for further analysis, maybe using HDInsight? Please post your comments!
An error occurred while saving the comment Chris Kirby
commented
I personally would use this feature for transferring sql azure backups and table data from azure to my on prem systems...for local usage, disaster recovery, and analysis. I also have usecases where i need to automate the transfer on on prem data to azure blob storage as well.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
625 votes
SSL only requires multiple IPs when the client is on Windows XP, using an older version of Internet Explorer. Most modern browsers support SNI (Server Name Indication) and thus don’t require multiple IPs.
Support for multiple IPs is under review in the team.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,211 votes
Windows Azure Websites offers the ability to have smaller deployed websites. The ability to have multiple roles on a single VM instance is still in planning.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
57 votes
Thank you for your suggestion! We would like to know what your concern is around schema modification – is it because you don’t always get granted schema modification rights? Are you concerned about administration/maintenance overhead of additional objects? Or are you concerned about additional overhead it places on the database?
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
Thanks for the suggestion! We are evaluating the priority and cost for implementing this.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
105 votes
This ask is currently on our backlog and will be prioritized accordingly. It is unlikely to happen in the coming year, and we will update when the status changes.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,107 votes
We understand this is a top customer ask and as such it is currently on our backlog to be prioritized. We will update when the status changes.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,416 votes
We understand this is a top customer ask and as such it is currently on our backlog to be prioritized. We will update when the status changes.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,705 votes
This work is on our backlog and currently under consideration. We will update here if this changes.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
-
1,173 votes
We are likely to support this in phases. Stay tuned for more details.
Chris Kirby
supported this idea
·
So glad this is under review, we really need the ability to index specific fields on tables. You can do a lot with a solid partitioning strategy today, but in almost every case, I still need this feature to maximize performance.