best design solution to migrate data from SQL Azure to Azure Table - azure

In our service, we are using SQL Azure as the main storage, and Azure table for the backup storage. Everyday about 30GB data is collected and stored to SQL Azure. Since the data is no longer valid from the next day, we want to migrate the data from SQL Azure to Azure table every night.
The question is.. what would be the most efficient way to migrate data from Azure to Azure table?
The naive idea i came up with is to leverage the producer/consumer concept by using IDataReader. That is, first get a data reader by executing "select * from TABLE" and put data into a queue. At the same time, a set of threads are working to grab data from the queue, and insert them into Azure Table.
Of course, the main disadvantage of this approach (i think) is that we need to maintain the opened connection for a long time (might be several hours).
Another approach is to first copy data from SQL Azure table to local storage on Windows Azure, and use the same producer/consumer concept. In this approach we can disconnect the connection as soon as the copy is done.
At this point, i'm not sure which one is better, or even either of them is a good design to implement. Could you suggest any good design solution for this problem?
Thanks!

I would not recommend using local storage primarily because
It is transient storage.
You're limited by the size of local storage (which in turn depends on the size of the VM).
Local storage is local only i.e. it is accessible only to the VM in which it is created thus preventing you from scaling out your solution.
I like the idea of using queues, however I see some issues there as well:
Assuming you're planning on storing each row in a queue as a message, you would be performing a lot of storage transactions. If we assume that your row size is 64KB, to store 30 GB of data you would be doing about 500000 write transactions (and similarly 500000 read transactions) - I hope I got my math right :). Even though the storage transactions are cheap, I still think you'll be doing a lot of transactions which would slow down the entire process.
Since you're doing so many transactions, you may get hit by storage thresholds. You may want to check into that.
Yet another limitation is the maximum size of a message. Currently a maximum of 64KB of data can be stored in a single message. What would happen if your row size is more than that?
I would actually recommend throwing blob storage in the mix. What you could do is read a chunk of data from SQL table (say 10000 or 100000 records) and save that data in blob storage as a file. Depending on how you want to put the data in table storage, you could store the data in CSV, JSON or XML format (XML format for preserving data types if it is needed). Once the file is written in blob storage, you could write a message in the queue. The message will contain the URI of the blob you've just written. Your worker role (processor) will continuously poll this queue, get one message, fetch the file from blob storage and process that file. Once the worker role has processed the file, you could simply delete that file and the message.

Related

Storing IOT Data in Azure: SQL vs Cosmos vs Other Methods

The project I am working on as an architect has got an IOT setup where lots of sensors are sending data like water pressure, temperature etc. to an FTP(cant change it as no control over it due to security). From here few windows service on Azure pull the data and store it into an Azure SQL Database.
Here is my observation with respect to this architecture:
Problems: 1 TB limit in Azure SQL. With higher tier it can go to 4 TB but that's the max. So it does not appear to be infinitely scalable plus with size, the query issues could be a problem. Columnstore index and partitioning seem to be options but size limitation and DTUs is a deal breaker.
Problem-2- IOT data and SQL Database(downstream storage) seem to be tightly coupled. If some customer wants to extract few months of data or even more with millions of rows, DB will get busy and possibly throttle other customers due to DTU exhaustion.
I would like to have some ideas on possibly scaling this further. SQL DB is great and with JSON support it is awesome but a it is not horizontally scalable solution.
Here is what I am thinking:
All the messages should be consumed from FTP by Azure IOT hub by some means.
From the central hub, I want to push all messages to Azure Blob Storage in 128 MB files for later analysis at cheap cost.
At the same time,  I would like all messages to go to IOT hub and from there to Azure CosmosDB(for long term storage)\Azure SQL DB(Long term but not sure due to size restriction).
I am keeping data in blob storage because if client wants or hires a Machine learning team to create some models, I would prefer them to pull data from Blob storage rather than hitting my DB.
Kindly suggest few ideas on this. Thanks in advance!!
Chandan Jha
First, Azure SQL DB does have Hyperscale which is much larger than 4TB. That said, there is a tipping point where it makes sense to consider alternative architectures when you get to be bigger than what one machine can handle for your solution. While CosmosDB does give you a horizontal sharding solution, you can do the same with N SQL Databases (there are libraries to help there). Stepping back, it is actually pretty important to understand what you want to do with the data if it were in a database. Both CosmosDB and SQL DB are set up for OLTP-style operations (with some limited forms of broader queries - SQL DB supports columnstore and batch mode, for example, which means you could do a reasonably-sized data mart just fine there too). If you are just storing things in the database in the hope of needing to support future data scientists, then you may or may not really need either of these two OLTP stores.
Synapse SQL is set up for analytics and generally has support to read from data in formats in Azure Storage. So, this may be a better strategy if you want to support arbitrarily-large IoT data and do analytics/ML processing over it.
If you know your solution will never be above , you may not need to consider something like Synapse, but it is set up for those scenarios if you are of sufficient size.
Option - 1:
Why don't you extract and serialize the data based on the partition id (device id), send it over the to IoT hub, where you can have the Azure Functions or Logic Apps that de-serializes the data into files that are stored in the blob containers.
Option - 2:
You can also attempt to create a module that extracts the data into excel file, which is then sent to the IoT hub to be stored in the storage containers.

Azure Storage: Table vs Blob

Here is the problem. I have the devices pushing telemetry messages to Azure IoT hub and currently, I save all messages to the Table Storage with partition key device Id and row key telemetry kind. What I want to do is restrict the size of stored data. For instance, the table should keep only up to 50 MB and the should be cleared. What kind of storage should I use for such use case and what are the benefits? Any suggestions are highly appreciated.
Neither Azure Tables nor Azure Blobs have the feature where the content automatically gets deleted after a certain size is reached. In fact, I don't think I have come across any cloud storage solution that offers it (I've seen the data gets automatically deleted based on age).
Thus if you want to delete the data once it reaches a certain size, you will have to write some code and schedule it (using either Functions or WebJobs). That code will find the size occupied and delete the data going over the limit.
Between Blobs and Tables, I am somewhat conflicted. With Blobs, it is much easier to get the storage consumed - You just list the blobs in a container and sum up the size of the blobs. With tables, you will need to keep on fetching entities (i.e. download the data) and calculate the size of that data. But then deleting data from tables is easier as you will be deleting rows (unless you store each record in a separate blob).
If it were not on the data size and rather based on the data age, I would have recommended Cosmos DB. Though more expensive than Azure Storage, but you could define TTL at the collection level and based on that policy, the documents will be automatically deleted.

Limits on File Count for Azure Blob Storage

Currently, I have a large set of text files which contain (historical) raw data from various sensors. New files are received and processed every day. I'd like to move this off of an on-premises solution to the cloud.
Would Azure's Blob storage be an appropriate mechanism for this volume of small(ish) private files? or is there another Azure solution that I should be pursuing?
Relevent Data (no pun intended) & Requirements-
The data set contains a millions files of mostly small files, for a total of near 400gb. The average file size is around 50kb, but some files could exceed 40mb.
I need to maintain the existing data set for posterity's sake.
New files would be uploaded daily, and then processed once. Processing would be handled by Background Workers reading files off a queue.
Certain files would be downloaded / reviewed / reprocessed after the initial processing.
Let me elaborate more on David's comments.
As David mentioned, there's no limit on number of objects (files) that you can store in Azure Blob Storage. The limit is of the size of the storage account which currently is 500TB. As long as you stay in this limit you will be good. Further, you can have 100 storage accounts in an Azure Subscription so essentially the amount of data that you will be able to store is practically limitless.
I do want to mention one more thing though. It seems that the files that are uploaded in blob storage are once processed and then kind of archived. For this I suggest you take a look at Azure Cool Blob Storage. It is essentially meant for this purpose only where you want to store objects that are not frequently accessible yet when you need those objects they are accessible almost immediately. The advantage of using Cool Blob Storage is that writes and storage is cheaper as compared to Hot Blob Storage accounts however the reads are expensive (which makes sense considering their intended use case).
So a possible solution would be to save the files in your Hot Blob Storage accounts. Once the files are processed, they are moved to Cool Blob Storage. This Cool Blob Storage account can be in the same or different Azure Subscription.
I'm guessing it CAN be used as a file system, is the right (best) tool for the job.
Yes, Azure Blobs Storage can be used as cloud file system.
The data set contains a millions files of mostly small files, for a total of near 400gb. The average file size is around 50kb, but some files could exceed 40mb.
As David and Gaurav Mantri mentioned, Azure Blob Storage could meet this requirement.
I need to maintain the existing data set for posterity's sake.
Data in Azure Blob Storage is durable. You could reference the SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENTS of Storage.
New files would be uploaded daily, and then processed once. Processing would be handled by Background Workers reading files off a queue.
You can use Azure Function to do the file processing work. Since it will do once a day, you could add a TimerTrigger Function.
//This function will be executed once a day
public static void TimerJob([TimerTrigger("0 0 0 * * *")] TimerInfo timerInfo)
{
//write the processing job here
}
Certain files would be downloaded / reviewed / reprocessed after the initial processing.
Blobs can be downloaded or updated at anytime you want.
In addition, if your data processing job is very complicated, you also could store your data in Azure Data Lake Store and do the data processing job using Hadoop analytic frameworks such as MapReduce or Hive. Microsoft Azure HDInsight clusters can be provisioned and configured to directly access data stored in Data Lake Store.
Here are the differences between Azure Data Lake Store and Azure Blob Storage.
Comparing Azure Data Lake Store and Azure Blob Storage

automatic backups of Azure blob storage?

I need to do an automatic periodic backup of an Azure blob storage to another Azure blob storage.
This is in order to guard against any kind of malfunction in the software.
Are there any services which do that? Azure doesn't seem to have this
As #Brent mentioned in the comments to Roberto's answer, the replicas are for HA; if you deleted a blob, that delete is replicated instantly.
For blobs, you can very easily create asynchronous copies to a separate blob (even in a separate storage account). You can also make snapshots which capture a blob at a current moment in time. At first, snapshots don't cost anything, but if you start modifying the blocks/pages referred to by the snapshot, then new blocks/pages are allocated. Over time, you'll want to start purging your snapshots. This is a great way to keep data "as-is" over time and revert back to a snapshot if there's a malfunction in your software.
With queues, the malfunction story isn't quite the same, as typically you'd only have a small number of queue items present (at least that's the hope; if you have thousands of queue messages, this is typically a sign that your software is falling behind). In any event: You could, when writing queue messages, write your queue messages to blob storage, for archive purposes, in case there's a malfunction. I wouldn't recommend using blob- based messaging for scaling/parallel processing, since they don't have the mechanisms in place that queues do, but you could use them manually in case of malfunction.
There's no copy function for tables. You'd need to write to two tables during your write.
Azure keeps 3 redundant copies of your data in different locations in the same data centre where your data is hosted (to guard against hardware failure).
This applies to blob, table and queue storage.
Additionally, You can enable geo-replication on all of your storage. Azure will automatically keep redundant copies of your data in separate data centres. This guards against anything happening to the data centre itself.
See Here

Azure blobs, what are they for?

I'm reading about Azure blobs and storage, and there are things I don't understand.
First, you can hire Azure for just hosting, but when you create a web role ... do you need storage for the .dll's and other files (.js and .css) ?? Or there are a small storage quota in a worker role you can use? how long is it? I cannot understand getting charged every time a browser download a CSS file, so I guess I can store those things in another kind of storage.
Second, you get charged for transaction and bandwidth, so it's not a good idea to provide direct links to the blobs in your websites, then... what do you do? Download it from your web site code and write to the client output stream on the fly from ASP.NET? I think I've read that internal trafic/transactions are for free, so it looks like a "too-good-for-be-truth" solution :D
Is the trafic between hosting and storage also free?
Thanks in advance.
First, to answer your main question: blobs are best used for dynamic data files. If you run a YouTube sorta site, you would use blobs to store videos in every compressed state and thumbnails to images generated from those videos. Tables within table storage are best for dynamic data that does not require files. For example comments on YouTube videos would likely be best stored by tables in ATS.
You generally want a storage account for at least: publishing your deployments into Azure and to have your compute nodes transfer their diagnostic data to, for when you're deployed and need to monitor your compute nodes
Even though you publish your deployments THROUGH a storage account, the deployment code lives on your compute nodes. .CSS/.HTML files served by your app are served through your node's storage space which you get plenty of (it is NOT a good place for your dynamic data however)
You pay for traffic/data that crosses the Azure data center boundary, irregardless where it came from. Furthermore, transactions (reads or writes) between your azure table storage and anywhere else are not free. You also pay for storing the data in the storage account (storing data on compute nodes themselves is not metered). Data that does not leave their data center is not subject to transfer fees. Now in reality, the costs are so low, that you have to be pushing gigabytes per day to start noticing
Don't store any dynamic data only on compute instances. That data will get purged whenever you redeploy your app or whenever they decide to move your app onto a different node.
Hope this helps

Resources