We have our own application that stores contacts in an SQL database. What all is involved in getting up and running in the cloud so that each user of the application can have his own, private list of contacts, which will be synced with both his computer and his phone?
I am trying to get a feeling for what Azure might cost in this regard, but I am finding more abstract talk than I am concrete scenarios.
Let's say there are 1,000 users, and each user has 1,000 contacts that he keeps in his contacts book. No user can see the contacts set up by any other user. Syncing should occur any time the user changes his contact information.
Thanks.
While the Windows Azure Cloud Platform is not intended to compete directly with consumer-oriented services such as Dropbox, it is certainly intended as a platform for building applications that do that. So your particular use case is a good one for Windows Azure: creating a service for keeping contacts in sync, scalable across many users, scalable in the amount of data it holds, and so forth.
Making your solution is multi-tenant friendly (per comment from #BrentDaCodeMonkey) is key to cost-efficiency. Your data needs are for 1K users x 1K contacts/user = 1M contacts. If each contact is approx 1KB then we are talking about approx 1GB of storage.
Checking out the pricing calculator, the at-rest storage cost is $9.99/month for a Windows Azure SQL Database instance for 1GB (then $13.99 if you go up to 2GB, etc. - refer to calculator for add'l projections and current pricing).
Then you have data transmission (Bandwidth) charges. Though since the pricing calculator says "The first 5 GB of outbound data transfers per billing month are also free" you probably won't have any costs with current users, assuming moderate smarts in the sync.
This does not include the costs of your application. What is your application, how does it run, etc? Assuming there is a client-side component, (typically) this component cannot be trusted to have the database connection. This would therefore require a server-side component running that could serve as a gatekeeper for the database. (You also, usually, don't expose the database to all IP addresses - another motivation for channeling data through a server-side component.) This component will also cost money to operate. The costs are also in the pricing calculator - but if you chose to use a Windows Azure Web Site that could be free. An excellent approach might be the nifty ASP.NET Web API stack that has recently been released. Using the Web API, you can implement a nice REST API that your client application can access securely. Windows Azure Web Sites can host Web API endpoints. Check out the "reserved instance" capability too.
I would start out with Windows Azure Web Sites, but as my service grew in complexity/sophistication, check out the Windows Azure Cloud Service (as a more advance approach to building server-side components).
Related
I am developing a Xamarin mobile app that requires a central cloud data storage (so a database). I also need an app service to host an API to interface with the database. I have been leaning towards Azure for both of these needs to keep everything in the Microsoft/Azure space and I am also familiar with it, but I am not sure if that would be overkill for my needs.
The data I need to store is only a few hundred records across a couple of tables and does not contain sensitive information. The app service would be quite small. I used their cost calculator with the cheapest options and that came out to only about $7/month for a small database and they have a Free Tier for the app service, although I have read that it is very slow, not sure to what extent though for the simple use case I have for it. This is very reasonable unless I have to upgrade to the Basic Tier App Service which jumps up to $70/month, that becomes a bit more than what I am looking to spend for this.
Wondering if folks know if the Free Tier of the Azure App Service would be impractically slow to host an API. It is listed as using Shared Cores, 1 GB RAM, and 1GB of storage. Also open to suggestions for other options that play well with .NET. Thanks!
I run several web services between AWS and Azure. Depending on how you are planning to write your App Service you can go with Azure VM Standard B1s and they will fall under FREE tier usage. Else around $10 per month.
You can run an embedded DB like SQL Lite with ASP.net. I use Spring Boot and works well.
I have actually pay-as-you-go plan in my account right now and I am using free 20MB database to all my projects in this account. I've created mobile services for my mobile app and it's time to release this project. So I think the best for me right now is move from Free Mobile Services to Basic so I can have unlimited devices to use this. But I don't know how much database size and bandwidth I would need. I just want to set my plan to Basic and create new database and then pay how much bandwidth and database size I would need.
I found this calculator and I just want to buy that Basic services with 1 unit and I just don't want to fill any other things (not because I don't want them because I just don't know how many and that it would be great that with rising app using there would be rising too). Is it possible?
I hope I explained my problem well.
Btw: What unit means in "1.5M API calls per unit"?
Thanks
Yes, you can continue to use Free SQL DB with Basic tier of Windows Azure Mobile Services. SQL and Mobile Services are separate items on your subscription and each can be scaled independently of the other. In practice if you have a lot of load, you will likely need to scale both - for architectural reasons.
Egress bandwidth for Mobile Service responses to the client is included in Mobile Services pricing. If you don't use SQL in the same data center, you may incur separate bandwidth charges. Although for latency reasons, we strongly recommend using a database and Mobile Service in the same data center which also eliminates egress costs for Mobile Service - SQL interaction.
You can purchase 1-6 units of Basic tier of Mobile Services. Each unit provides 1.5M API calls per month. So if you buy 2 Basic units, you will get 3M API calls per month and so on.
Thanks.
Dinesh Kulkarni
(Program Manager, Windows Azure)
Windows Azure has a store.
The stuff you can by there are called Add-Ons, and they fall in two categories: Service and data.
I understand the point of some of the service offerings, but not all, and I don't yet understand the point of the data offerings at all.
With services, some offerings are database deployments such as ClearDB (MySQL) and MongoLab. That makes sense to me: You get those databases deployed and monitored with a few clicks, yet those databases run in the same data center as the applications that consume them, which is good for performance and security.
For most other services (there is a simple scheduler application, for example), it seems that the only advantage is the unified billing method. Is that a correct observation, or is there more to it?
Then the data offerings: The fact that I can buy bing query transactions cannot really have anything to do with the rest of my azure account, right? Technically, it's just bing (or whatever other data offering you look at) and presumably I'm going against the same bing api that I would have used previously (I'm assuming that was possible). There is nothing really deployed in any Azure data center the moment I buy it, is there? So in what sense is that an Add-On?
In a nutshell, am I missing something or are most Add-Ons just a method of buying external services and having the billed on my Azure account?
If you can answer the question for other 'app stores', you can answer it for Windows Azure. We know about THE App Store (as per the court battles over the name) which is the only way to get applications onto the closed (iOS) device. There is also a Mac App Store which would seem unnecessary because of the ability to install apps by yourself (which makes it more similar to the Azure store). In this case the reason for the store is discoverability, association with the store brand (where the buyer assumes a degree of vetting), a single point for updates, and simplified billing.
The Windows Azure Store (and data marketplace) exist for similar reasons. It is less about the technical benefits than the association with the Azure brand. Since SO is technical, let me highlight some (largely) technical aspects:
Don't assume that the service will run in the same data centre. In most cases it probably won't.
There is an advantage of having everything in one place from an operational point of view. Granting of operator access to the subscription means that you don't have to administer accounts on the service. I have had problems with this though - where the service made it difficult to do other things (such as get support) because the Azure identity wasn't handled very well. (I had this with New Relic).
The combined billing works on credit card payments only. Last time I checked (Summer 2013) there was no way to get an add-on with a pay-by-invoice subscription, so a second subscription (with credit card) was needed anyway.
Add-ons seems to still be in 'preview', which may indicate low adoption. Microsoft probably hasn't seen it grow the way they expected and may not be developing it much in future. This is opinion only, and shouldn't affect the service (after all the store is just a gateway, and has no (little) technical impact on the service provided)
Don't completely ignore the store however. The biggest benefit seems to be the free tier of the servers and reduced pricing, where Microsoft has managed to get service providers to make the store attractive. For example, the SendGrid free option provides 25,000 emails per month, and there doesn't seem to be a free option on SendGrid.com. New Relic pricing was (and maybe still is) significantly less.
Pay attention mainly to the pricing benefits, rather than perceived technical benefits.
I have built one utility (startup task) for end user Azure application.
That start-up task is going to post some of data from that webrole application (hosted on any region as per end user choice) to database (Hosted on East Asia) through REST API (Hosted on East Asia).
So if end user has hosted their application on same region (East Asia) then Azure doesn't cost anything for data transfer to me as well as for end user (correct me if I understood wrong).
In another case if end user has hosted their application on another region then it will cost to end user to transfer data to REST API that is on another region.
What I have done to reduce this cost, I have set up REST API in all of regions and in startup task tell user to set path of specific REST API according to region where they are going to deploy their application. Now in this case end user doesn't cost anything for data transfer But My REST API (hosted in different region ) will transfer data to database (hosted on East Asia) so it will cost me for that as well as for to host REST API on all regions to reduce end user cost.
In the case above is there a way to reduce cost using shared database and removing multiple REST API hosted on all region? Also please suggest if a better solution exists to reduce cost to me as well as for end user.
Interesting scenario: You basically have your end-user deploying the app for themselves, to the region of choice? What is the purpose of the database upload via REST API: Backup, or for live data?
One thing I'm not understanding is the question about a shared database. From your description, there's already a shared database, as each user is pushing data through a REST API to a single database in East Asia. Is this not correct?
Based on the information you provided, where all data goes to one datacenter, I see 3 options, two that you already pointed out:
User hosts app in any of 8 datacenters, you host REST API in one datacenter. In this case, user gets best local app performance between on-prem and app, user pays for egress to your API, and user possibly sees latency when transferring data across datacenters.
User hosts app in any of 8 datacenters. You host REST API in all datacenters. User's data transfer is free to local REST API, and very fast. However, you then transfer data to East Asia database, which will cost you egress bandwidth if the user is not hosted in East Asia. Also you now have cost of many additional REST API instances.
User host ONLY in East Asia, along with your REST API and database. All datacenter bandwidth is free and fast. User may see latency connecting from on-prem to app, depending on where they're located.
In each case, you have the user deploying their own hosted service, which then talks to yours. Is it possible to optimize user cost by having them all access the same hosted service, but with different credentials?
For your cost, hosting a REST API in every datacenter seems like a large expense, considering you need at least 2 instances running in each datacenter to obtain Windows Azure's uptime SLA. But... again, I don't exactly understand your app's scenario.
Base on my understanding, it seems the scenario is a bit strange. If you’re providing a package that end users can host using their own Windows Azure account, why let them use their own database as well? Or do you mean the you’re providing end users the source code of your project as a sample? In any case, I think it is better to ask end users to provide their own database account. If you want to design a REST API for yourself, then host it in your own Windows Azure service. Please do not distribute the package to your end users. In addition, for more information about billing, you can also contact our customer support on https://support.microsoft.com/oas/default.aspx?prid=14234&st=1&wfxredirect=1&sd=gn.
Best Regards,
Ming Xu.
I think in this case, it is better to ask the customers to provide their own database. If you need to use your own database, it is hard to save cost on your side. You can use multiple databases hosted in different data centers. But obviously that requires more cost. You can also use a single database, but then it is inevitable that some users will transfer data from another data center. However, you can ask the users to pay for the cost by increasing the price of your product. But looks like better to ask the user to provide their own database (they can even choose on-premises databases if they like). This also helps to increase security, since users' data would not be shared.
Best Regards,
Ming Xu.
I'm considering to join the Windows Azure Platform Introductory Special, but I'm a little bit afraid of losing money with it. I don't wanna develop any fancy large scale application, I want to join just to learn Azure and do my experiments, what should I be afraid of?
In the transference, it says: "Data Transfers (per region)", what does that mean?
Can I put limits to stop the app if it goes over this plan in order to avoid get charged?
Can it be "pre pay" instead "bill pay"?
Would it be enough for a blog?
Any experiencie so far?
Kind regards.
As ligget pointed out, Azure isn't cost affect as a host for an application that can be easily deployed to a traditional shared hosting provider. Azure's target market are those that want dedicated resources without the need to micro-manage the infrasture and the capability to easily scale up/down based on demand.
That said, here's the answers to the questions you posted:
Data Transfers are based on bandwidth in and out of the hosting data center. bandwidth for communication occuring within components (SQL Azure, Windows Azure, Azure Storage, etc...) in the same datacenter are not billable.
Your usage is not currently capped when the free quotas are used up. However, you will recieved warning emails when those items approach their usage threadsholds.
There is the option to pay your subscription using a PO, but the minimum threshold for most of these operations is $500/month. So as a hobbyist, its unlikely you're wanting that route.
The introductory special does not provide enough resources for hosting a 24x7 personal blog. That level includes only 25hrs of compute resources. Each hour a single instance of your application is deployed will count against this, even if the application received no traffic. Think of it like renting office space. You still pay rent on the office even if there are no customers there.
All this said, there's still much to be learned with the introductory special. The azure development tools allows you to work with Windows Azure and Azure storage locally and get a feel for how they work. The introductory special then lets you deploy those solutions so you can see what works and what doesn't (not everything that works locally works hosted).
I would recommend you host your blog somewhere else - it's a waste of resources running it on Azure and you'll find much cheaper options. A recently introduced extra small instance would be a better choice in this case, but AFAIK it is charged separately as of now, e.g. even when you have an MSDN subscription those extra small instance hours do not count towards free Azure hours that come with the subscription.
There is no pre-pay option I know of and it's not possible to stop the app automatically. It'll be running until the deployment is deleted (beware! even if suspended/stopped the deployment will continue to accrue charges). I believe you will be sent a notification shortly before reaching your free hours threshold.
Be aware that when launching more than 1 instance you are charged for every hour of every instance combined. This can happen for example when you have more than one role in your Azure project (1 web role + 1 worker role - a separate instance will be started for each role).
Data trasfer means your entire data trasfer: blobs/Table storage/queues (transfers between your hosted service and storage account inside the same data center are free) + whatever data is transfered in/out of your hosted application, e.g. when somebody visits your pages. When you create storage accounts and hosted services in Azure you will specify a region that will be hosting your account/app - hosting in Asia is slightly more expensive than in Europe/U.S.
Your best bet would be to contact Microsoft with these questions.