Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB Reviews

I use Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for some web applications.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it makes it easy for users to access web applications like Visio while not being complex like AWS at the same time.

The pricing of the solution is an area with certain shortcomings. From an improvement perspective, I wish for the solution to offer users an increased storage capacity at a cheaper price.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for a few months.

I rate the solution's stability eight to nine out of ten. The solution's stability is good.

It is a scalable solution.

There are almost 1,000 users of the solution in my institution.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

I think that there was a third-party involvement required during the solution's deployment phase.

Right now, I have opted for the student subscription plan, for which Microsoft charges me around 100 USD. The pricing of the solution depends on the solution's usage.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it. It is a cloud-based solution that is easy to deploy, easy to access, and provides users with more features compared to other clouds like AWS and GCP.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

We normally use Cosmos DB for data storage.

There are a lot of security features that can be integrated with Cosmos DB. The solution is easy to use, and it is also easy to integrate with several things for database use cases.

I would like the speed of transferring data to be improved.

I’ve been using it for two to three years, and I’m working on the latest version.

The solution is stable.

The solution is very scalable. We have more than 1,000 users in our company.

The initial setup is straightforward. We deploy Cosmos DB once or twice a quarter. We have three or four teams handling deployment and maintenance, which is about 38 members.

We implement the solution in-house.

We are receiving an ROI with this solution.

Cost isn’t a big hurdle for us right now. The solution is not costly.

I recommend Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB to anyone who wants to use it. If you are using Azure Stack, it is a good solution to use

Cosmos is a PaaS, so you don't need to worry about infrastructure and hosting. It has various APIs that allow it to integrate with other solutions. For example, we are using a MongoDB-compatible API for customers, which makes it easier for developers on the team who previously used MongoDB or are accustomed to the old document storage paradigm. 

The API compatibility has room for improvement, particularly integration with MongoDB. You have to connect to a specific flavor of MongoDB. We'd also like a richer query capability in line with the latest Mongo features. That is one thing on our wish list. The current version is good enough for our use case, but it could be improved.

We've been using Cosmos DB for about six to eight months.

Cosmos DB's reliability, performance, and scalability are all good. We can't complain. Azure has management outages, and the management windows that Azure publishes are still too big. They provide a 24 hour period in which maintenance will happen. Smaller, specific windows are easier to manage when you have a production system. Otherwise, it does a good job technically.

The scalability of the Azure platform is a given. It's easy to scale and quickly deploy. The API's richness also helped us. We use Cosmos DB for a public-facing application with upwards of a million users.

I think we have all the scalability that we need, and we like that the system doesn't have outages when it's updating. However, an on-prem version is required for some use cases, and they provide this now. 

Microsoft support is good if you contact a specialist. Getting in touch with the right specialist is crucial for whatever technology you're using on Azure. If you reach the right person, it's a dream, but that can be difficult in some cases can be difficult. You might go through several layers of support before you reach the platform experts.

We haven't used another solution for this particular use case. The product was benchmarked on Azure, so we used Cosmos DB. It wasn't like we were looking at different solutions, and we chose Cosmos.

Setting up the whole landscape took about a week. It doesn't take long. It's a PaaS, so the setup is mostly configuration. It's more like provisioning rather than deployment. You could probably set it up in a day if you wanted to. We set it up with an in-house team. About 15 to 20 people support the solution, but they aren't dedicated to Cosmos DB. They work on lots of things. 

Cosmos DB is a PaaS, so there are no upfront costs for infrastructure. There are only subscriptions you pay for Azure and things like that. But it's a PaaS, so it's a subscription service. The license isn't perpetual, and the cost might seem expensive on its face, but you have to look at the upkeep for infrastructure and what you're saving. 

I rate Cosmos DB eight out of 10. I would recommend it for an appropriate use case. However, you need to be aware of the system's limitations. If you're using the DocumentDB system, it's crucial to plan properly for document structure, etc. You also need to plan for failure to ensure that your system can survive when any node fails. Set up clustering, redundancy, high availability, and so on.

We provide automated solutions to manufacturing plants. 

The solution is user friendly and Microsoft's technical support is good. 

In Microsoft manufacturing, managers really need to know about the product. This market is flooded by other vendors. So putting Microsoft in action in such places looks challenging.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for four months. 

Microsoft Cosmos is stable. 

It is a scalable solution and twelve hundred users are using the solution. 

The entire POC process and Microsoft's entire page were really smooth. There are no hiccups at all, and the kind of documentation support has really helped to build a competitive customer, so that is good enough.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

The technical support team is good. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. Two developers and one architect were enough for the deployment. The maintenance is easy. 

Microsoft provides fair pricing. 

If somebody is really looking to adopt a solution like this, this is the best option to go.

My current title is that of a Solution Sales Architect.

The biggest benefit of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is the general cloud model that Azure gives you. It provides more flexibility from a cost and data perspective. The solution is reasonable. Microsoft gives the best security solutions with zero trust protection.

With Azure, you can start small and grow as you need.

I provide architect solutions on top of Azure. A couple of features that would help me in architectural solutions would be customizable architecture or customizable documentation, which both Microsoft Azure and Microsoft Teams can provide. I can easily pick and choose a couple of architecture and merge them. This would be a very helpful feature for me in my role.

I have had five years of experience working with Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

This solution is stable. I rarely receive concerns from my clients that they are facing any downtime or that some solutions or configurations are not working.

Azure cloud is very much scalable however, you do need to consider your database. If I am scaling the product, the traffic will increase and the database also has to be optimized in that way. 

My application is static, so it can be scaled to infinity, but the same cannot be done with the database. The database needs to be sufficient to get the load directly. I cannot go ahead and directly deploy a database with another skill functionality as I have to do some manual effort with downtime involved.

From a scalability perspective, the key database has to be optimized in a better way that can support auto-scaling architecture or scalability architecture.

The initial setup of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is straightforward.

Azure is a pay as you go subscription. Each month you utilize the solution and at the end of the month, based upon your utilization, you will get a report and invoice. It depends on the architecture and the services being used, how they are deployed and what the stories are. It is variable.

My general advice to anyone looking to implement Microsoft Azure would be to start small. When you see your application increase or your traffic increase on site, you can slowly scale. 

I would rate the solution a seven out of 10 overall.

I use the product for storing information related to our automation.

The product is simple to use. It is a NoSQL database. It is easy to commission the environment and use it.

It is not as easy to use as DynamoDB. The product always shows JSON-based documents. However, DynamoDB shows a table-based document. The documentation must be improved.

I used the solution a couple of months ago.

The tool’s stability is very good. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The tool is highly scalable. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We have more than 1000 users.

I used DynamoDB in my previous organization.

The initial setup is easy. The deployment could be completed within minutes.

The tool is not expensive. It is good for small use cases.

Cosmos DB is a good option if someone is looking for a NoSQL database. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

The product has a lot of useful features that are there and ready to use, it's also very easy to use.

There are features that are ADF only or ADB only, so it would be good to see more cross-compatibility between the two. The solution is also more expensive than the alternatives. 

I have been using the solution for over two and a half years.

The solution is stable.

Scalability is very good, you can scale up or down according to your requirements.

I have to say technical support is not very good as it takes too long. Sometimes it can take them two or three days to respond to your ticket.  

The setup for this solution isn't complex.

The cost very much depends on the task and on how much data is being processed and transferred.

The cost is the biggest limitation of this solution. I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We have a lot of use cases like for the web API backend where we have most of the processing jobs. It supports mobile, browser, and tablet. We have a single face application that interacts with the users and customers. It's backend and frontend architecture. For middleware, we use Kafka integration. We have PowerBI for reporting. 

I like the scalability. There aren't any constraints for posting in the geolocation. I also like the SQL architecture. 

The query is a little complex. SQL server should have more options. But the query should be better. 

The setup takes a bit of time but once it's done, it goes well. Backend developers need a bit of time to do the setup. 

I have been using DocumentDB for a little over a year. You can use the libraries that are available in the framework and connect to DocumentDB for your operation. 

It is stable but since we have multiple locations, if one point goes down, we can access another location easily. Most of the effort goes into the script and we use keywords to secure the accessibility and then we set up the encryption. Configuration takes time. We do it without self-script. If you do it manually, it is quite difficult but script does it in a better manner. 

We use our own documentation as our resource. Azure doesn't have many problems that we need to contact support except for developers who struggle to learn about SQL. They need training and to read up on the literature. 

We are satisfied with their support. 

It takes time to set up and understand. Since Azure has its own table, it's not so flexible. 

Before implementing, know now how to use DocumentDB. Understand your use case. From an architecture perspective, we have a use case where we wanted to use more SQ and we used DocumentDB as the first consideration. There isn't a better SQL than DocumentDB available. Cloud provides this type of platform.

The automatic performance is also very good. We did research on the internet and decided to go with DocumentDB. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten because there is what to be done for improvement. In the future, it should be simplified for developers so that it's not a hassle for them. There aren't many resources for SQL and DocumentDB. It may take time for more documentation to come out.