smithkl42

My feedback

  1. 271 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    9 comments  ·  Networking » VPN Gateway  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    This is critical, frankly. We've got dozens of remote users who need point-to-site connections, and it's utterly unscalable to use the existing certificate-based approach. It's frankly so difficult to do something simple, like revoke a user's certificate, that whatever the theoretical advantages to certificate-based authentication, in practice it's awful - you should assume that anybody who gets a certificate has access forever.

    smithkl42 supported this idea  · 
  2. 1,392 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    84 comments  ·  Storage » Tables  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    Appreciate the workaround. But the consensus that ATS has become - through inattention and neglect - an also-ran is hard to shake. Not sure how I could recommend that anyone build a solution on it at this point. At most, I would recommend ATS as a read-only data store, where you put data that you hope to never see again but aren't quite willing to say goodbye to.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    Let me give you an example of why this is critical. I have about 30 GB of event logs. I want to store these in ATS. The problem is that I need to be able to query them along multiple different axes - the company they belong to, the individual user they belong to, the date/time they came in, the event name, and so forth. And eventually, probably lots more. My current solution is to store the data "n" times, each one with a different partition-key/row-key schema, to enable querying along that particular dimension. So far so good - it's not a problem to write the data "n" times, given how well ATS performs, and how cheap it is.

    But the problem is maintenance. Right now, with about 30 GB of data, if I come up with a new dimension that I need to support, it takes me at least a day to write the scripts to export and then re-import the data to the new format (because it all has to be parallelized, and needs to track state for each portion I'm running in parallel, or it would take weeks); and even if I don't ***** up on the (very complex) import/export scripts somehow, it then takes at least 1-2 days to actually get all the data over to the new table.

    And that's simply not a scalable model. What happens when I don't have 30 GB of data I need to pivot, but 300 GB? Or 30 TB? The pivot scripts will take weeks to run, and maintaining any shred of consistency through the process gets very, very complicated.

    I get that this is a complex problem to solve. But it doesn't make it any less complicated by telling every ATS user to come up with their own (almost certainly unoptimal and buggy) solution.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    At this point, ATS is so behind the ball compared to all the other no-sql alternatives out there that it almost seems like a waste to continue with it. Wouldn't it make better sense just to make something like RavenDB or MongoDB a first-class citizen and move forward with that?

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    My goodness, Microsoft. What are you guys thinking? This has been supposedly "in the works" for years now, and it still isn't here?

    We currently have two supported options to choose from: (1) Table storage, which is basically just a glorified text file; and (2) Azure SQL, which is great, but scales like wet cement. We really need something somewhere in-between. Given any thought to supporting, say, MongoDB or CouchDB or Riak or... ? Those are currently *much* more full-featured than Azure table storage, and I can't for the life of me figure out why Azure wouldn't at least pick one to make a first-class citizen.

    smithkl42 supported this idea  · 
  3. 1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Virtual Machines  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    smithkl42 shared this idea  · 
  4. 460 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  14 comments  ·  Diagnostics and Monitoring  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    smithkl42 commented  · 

    Yeah, this sort of thing is critical.

  5. 1,684 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    49 comments  ·  Storage » Tables  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    smithkl42 supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base