63 votesneed-feedback · AdminSQL Database feature voting forum admins (Product Owner, Microsoft Azure) responded
This is a difficult one to handle technically. However the main theme is cost savings. Are there other cost-saving options (other than pausing) that could address this concern? For example, smaller vCore Managed Instances etc.? On the other hand, implementing pausable Managed Instance can also mean that resuming them will take several hours each time. Is this a concern? Thank you.
An error occurred while saving the commentPhil Marshall commented
Providing feedback as requested...
The cost savings is certainly a big driver for us.
I can see how the ramp-up time from a fully cold start on a large database would be a consequence, and in those cases a different solution would be nicer. SQL Server from the ground up really wants to be "Always On", rather than "Sometimes On and Sometimes Off" (so-so, ha I love the acronym).
Being able to turn-off-and-on might still be a valid use case, particularly in pre-production environments. We might choose this and wear the consequence of a long ramp-up.
Generally, the pattern I see is that we have "busy times" and "quiet times", and we don't want to pay for capacity we don't need during the "quiet times". Adding elasticity would be an alternative solution, especially for production environments. If you can focus efforts on getting a wider range of sizes, and add online-scaling between sizes, then we can automate some very decent cost savings for ourselves.
Planned for SQL DB- no time frame to share yet. Available in SQL Managed Instance
108 votesunder review · AdminAzure IaaS Engineering Team (Azure IaaS Engineering Team, Microsoft, Microsoft Azure) responded
This feature is under review for implementation.