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.
inattention and neglect is the perfect summary of ATS. Microsoft, up the price or do whatever, just do something.
SSD-backed storage + secondary indexes is a no-brainer.
Aaron, DocumentDB is not a replacement, it is a totally different beast and not a key-value store such as Table Storage. Also DocumentDB is not portable (yet at least) and gives you a lock-in to the public Azure cloud. Table Storage is portable through Azure Stack.
I dream and hope MS is picking up Table Storage again and gives us Premium (SSD-backed) and with secondary indexes. There's really no reason on this good earth they shouldn't do this!
Regarding table storage, I've also noticed that in the new portal when you look at diagnostics config in WebApps, there's only File Storage and Blob Storage as options, while in the classic portal you also have Table Storage as an option.
Even more, I've noticed that the internal logging in WebJobs via WebJobs Dashboard seems to have moved from using Table Storage to using Blob Storage - but that may be for any number of reasons, of course.
Anyways, I wouldn't recommend table storage as a long-term option for anything new for these reasons. And of course it's hard to use without any secondary indexing.
I have to say that I totally agree with people saying this is a MUST for azure table storage. Really, how is it possible to use this in any sensible way without custom indexing?
243 votesHans Olav Stjernholm supported this idea ·
For the traditional Microsoft Stack developers, the Azure Stack without SQL Databases is close to pointless. Here's the feeling I currently get:
Do you love steak? You want it your way? In your own house? Here you go: Vegan tofu steak!
I guess it's technically a steak, but man that's not the same thing!