Valur

My feedback

  1. 108 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Azure Search » Pricing and Quotas  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur shared this idea  · 
  2. 276 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  Azure Search » Pricing and Quotas  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
    Valur commented  · 

    I completly aggree. In my senario I have a index size that is just under 2 gig but growing slowly. The traffic to this is fairly low. Its very hard to justify the >3x price tag of Standard1 when the performance of Basic is more than enough except the capacity.

  3. 3,800 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    126 comments  ·  Azure Cosmos DB  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Reopening this user voice item as our support for Skip/Take (Offset/Limit) was only limited to single partition queries.

    Update.

    The newly released .NET SDK v3 now includes support for x-partition queries using Offset/Limit. You can learn more about v3 SDK and try it and provide feedback on our github repo here.
    github.com/azure/azure-cosmos-dotnet-v3

    We will also be back-porting this functionality to our .NET v2 SDK. This work will begin shortly and we anticipate it to be released in September.

    Once that is released we will mark this feature as complete.

    Thank you for your patience and votes.

    Valur commented  · 

    Any ETA???

    Valur supported this idea  · 
  4. 1,503 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    25 comments  ·  Azure Cosmos DB » SQL API  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    For applications that require cross document join, please consider the Gremlin API: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/cosmos-db/create-graph-dotnet, which has primitives for joins, traversals, and other graph operations.

    We are evaluating expanding the SQL grammar to support graph functionality, which will provide the ability to perform cross-document JOINs. Please upvote this item to help us prioritize this work.

    Valur supported this idea  · 
  5. 2,705 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    71 comments  ·  Azure Cosmos DB » SQL API  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
  6. 31 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Azure Functions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
  7. 1,559 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    58 comments  ·  Azure Cosmos DB » Management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur commented  · 

    You pay only for what you use. Isn´t that the main selling point of every cloud platform?? I think this is very important!

  8. 3,804 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    78 comments  ·  Azure Cosmos DB » SQL API  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
  9. 1,288 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    34 comments  ·  Azure Search » Pricing and Quotas  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
  10. 89 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    6 comments  ·  Signup and Billing  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Valur supported this idea  · 
  11. 1,200 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Folks,

    Thanks for the questions and suggestions. And apologies for not sharing any update on this thread for so long. We’ve been working on this problem and have announced changes on our official team blog (see here: https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2016/09/15/cleaning-up-the-azure-ad-and-microsoft-account-overlap/).

    First, we are acutely aware of the UX pain this is causing and we are sorry for this. We are trying to undo a decade and a half of systems divergence. There are literally hundreds of different engineering teams across Microsoft involved in this effort. So this is taking time.

    Second, we can’t easily “merge” two accounts, or allow IT to “take over” personal Microsoft accounts. There are two main hurdles: (1) The terms of service are fundamentally different for the two account types and (2) they are based on different technologies with different stacks (different identifiers, SDKs, token formats, etc.). We’re working to converge the two stacks but again this…

    Valur supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base