Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB Reviews

I used to work for a bank in Turkey and used Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB in the bank for reporting. We used the solution for customer relationship management (CRM) and cost management.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is easy to use and implement for application programmers.

The integration of the on-premise solution with the cloud can be difficult sometimes.

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

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a stable solution if you use it on the Azure cloud.

I rate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB a nine out of ten for stability.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a scalable solution. Currently, 10,000 users are using the solution. They use the dashboard application, but the dashboard application calls the data from Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward if you use it on the Azure cloud.

We use a Microsoft subject matter expert (SME) to integrate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB with the cloud or banking application. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB can be deployed in one day. The solution's implementation is very easy in the Azure portal, but the most time-consuming step is to define the old data model in Cosmos DB. The security and the integration between Azure and on-prem are also time-consuming.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is moderately priced, where it is neither expensive nor cheap.

The solution's licensing is usage-based. You will have an enterprise agreement if you use the solution in a cloud environment. The enterprise agreement is complex, where it is usage-based in addition to a base price. They decrease the solution's cost for an enterprise agreement, calculate the usage, and charge monthly bills.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB was deployed on the cloud in our organization. Only two or three people are enough to deploy and maintain the solution. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is the best solution for customers needing high-quality technical support.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB a nine out of ten.

Our current project primarily relies on the file system to handle incoming source tests. Within this setup, we capture both metadata and result data from these tests. We extract metadata information from these files and store it in Azure Cosmos DB and we have several software services in place to facilitate this process.

It is one of the simpler databases to work with in terms of code management, tracking, and debugging due to its straightforward data storage and retrieval mechanisms.

There is room for improvement in their customer support services.

In one of our recent projects, we stored metadata information and log data within Cosmos DB.

It offers good stability capabilities.

It offers impressive scalability, both in terms of throughput and storage. Its ability to scale dynamically allows us to align the database resources with the specific demands of our applications. Given its scalability and performance capabilities, we highly recommend it for use in large enterprises and organizations.

There were instances where their customer support services were slow. As previously mentioned, when it came to setting up Azure Cosmos DB, not everyone was proficient in cost considerations, and our team lacked extensive prior experience. Our main support was provided by Microsoft's documentation and we were able to successfully navigate these challenges. I would rate it eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup presented some challenges and required us to delve deeper into understanding the daily implications. Microsoft documentation proved to be a valuable resource in navigating this process.

The initial setup, planning, and configuration took approximately one to two weeks to complete. The timeline for implementing the solution varied based on the specific use case and the discussions held with the client. We conducted regular reviews, documented our progress, and established a static attack system. Due to some design-related confusion, the overall implementation process was extended to about one to two months. Still, Cosmos DB and related components were set up within one to two weeks.

Its pricing structure is quite flexible. It operates on a pay-as-you-go model, which means the cost is directly tied to the resources you consume and the throughput you require. Initially, our expenses were relatively low because we didn't store a significant amount of data, but as our storage needs increased over time, our expenses naturally grew in proportion to the resources and capacity we used.

Initially, we encountered some challenges in understanding it, as it wasn't as straightforward as managing an SQL Server database or setting up environments within Azure Data Factory and DevOps. This complexity is related to the fact that Cosmos DB offers a range of additional features and capabilities. Our initial difficulties could also be attributed to our team's limited prior experience with Cosmos DB. Considering these factors, I would rate our experience with it at an eight out of ten. Beyond these initial hurdles, we found it to be a valuable and capable solution.

We use it as a data storage platform for several proprietary applications that we have designed and built and now support. We generally use it to be able to scale so that our customers can search a sizable amount of data. We have millions of records that include an extensive amount of text.

We implemented Azure Cosmos DB for our tokenization process. We had originally built a data dictionary to be able to tokenize different words within our MongoDB collection, but over a period of three years or so, we found that there were some limitations to doing that. The data dictionary needed to be updated, so we turned to the vector search feature because it essentially allows us to measure the similarity between words. Those sorts of comparisons could be done very easily. There is the ability to tokenize words, which we then use in the search functionality provided for the users of our applications. It has helped us improve the search functionality of our applications.

I landed on it as an architectural component of one of our first solutions. I went in expecting its benefits. It delivered the benefits of being able to quickly scale and being able to support semi-structured, unstructured, and structured data sets or data properties. All of these aspects are supported. We were able to realize its benefits early on.

We have used the vector database with Azure AI services. It works fine. They are embedded vectors. We are running some text through Azure AI. It then returns these embedded vectors, and we store those. We are able to use those vector values or vectors to determine the similarity between various words that are being searched in our applications.

The Azure Cosmos DB's ability to search through large amounts of data is excellent. It is fantastic. We have benefited from it. It is great.

There are a number of different APIs or data storage supported in Azure Cosmos DB. Specifically, we are using the MongoDB API, so we leverage it in that way. I like the flexibility that it offers. My team does not have to spend time building out database tables. We can get going fairly quickly with being able to read and write data into a MongoDB collection that is hosted inside Azure Cosmos DB.

I found it very easy to use. We have been using it for five years, so it is quite flexible for us. The ease of use is quite high for us.

It is easy to use, but optimization has been a mixed experience. It has been more of trying to figure out how to do so. We have not found much support there, so we have to come up with our own way of optimizing it in different ways. That is one area of improvement. We would like to have more tools that support the optimization of Azure Cosmos DB. There are not many tools out there. We have had to develop our own tools internally, such as a clean plan or query plan, and look at the index usage, throughput, and those sorts of things. The portal experience for optimizing and monitoring the service needs a few enhancements.

I am looking at it through the lens of MongoDB API. There are four or five other APIs that are supported in Azure Cosmos DB. The MongoDB API experience could be improved substantially by having a more user-friendly set of administrative tools so that I can go out there and query the documents that are part of the collection. Currently, I am working around that by using third-party tools like 3T. I also use MongoDB's Compass client tool. They can make this part of managing the database or the collection a lot easier by providing some built-in toolsets, similar to what is offered by Azure with Azure Data Studio. That is a big area for improvement. 

We should also be able to better manage the cost. There have been some improvements there, but there is still room for improvement in terms of how costs are managed through the Azure portal relative to Azure Cosmos DB. To me, it is one of the more expensive services out there depending on how it is being leveraged.

One of the key limitations is that only so many vectors can be supported. It does not work very well with the large amount of text that has to be embedded in the vectors. That is one limitation we have run into with the feature set.

It has been five years. 

The SLA is pretty good. We have been able to at least get past 99.9%. We are probably closer to 99.99%. So, overall, it has done well over the five years. Just like with most things, there were a few instances where it crashed or was not available. Those instances are memorable, but they are few and very far apart.

Its latency is good. The availability is also good.

Its scalability is good. However, redundancy does not work very well. Redundancy is having a set of backups. It is also a part of high availability. We have used some of the redundancy features in Azure Cosmos DB, and it created problems for us consistently. We recently had to move away from having a redundant copy of the data and just having a single copy. Of course, we have adequate backups.

Through the lens of MongoDB API, the scalability can be better. However, the limitations are core to the actual platform. MongoDB is not designed to scale horizontally, so that is how Azure offers it. It scales vertically which means that I can go and request more compute and more memory RUs for the instance that I am using. If I was supporting multiple workloads that had different read/ write patterns, it would work, but it is not designed to do that well at its core, as I understand it. It is less of a function of Azure Cosmos DB and more of a function of MongoDB itself.

The dynamic scaling has helped decrease our organization’s overhead costs. We are able to scale up during business hours, or when there is demand, we scale automatically. There are some tools that we have built and some processes that do that. We can also scale down during non-business hours or when the demand drops for the database or the data store. It has helped to manage scaling costs.

I contacted their support this year when we had some issues. When it comes to customer service, it always comes down to the person you get on the phone or who picks up your ticket. 

Regarding Azure Cosmos DB, we felt frustrated when we needed that support from Microsoft. It has not been there because the things that we are dealing with are generally more complex than most customers would have to deal with. At times, the representatives or engineers we got or who picked up the tickets we submitted did not have the breadth of experience needed to support us or resolve the issues. So, we resolve the issues ourselves the best we can.

Negative

We use some of the alternatives because it does not solve everything. There is no such thing as one perfect data store. We use Azure SQL instances. We use SQL and VM in Azure. We have started doing a lot more Postgres, which is the flavor of the time. Everybody seems to be moving to Postgres all of a sudden.

Synapse is another tool. It is another Azure service that we use. It just depends on what type of data we are using and what makes sense in terms of the implementation of the application. Those are some of the alternatives that we have used.

Its deployment is easy. Setting up the service is easy. You make a decision around where you want to deploy and those sorts of things. There is a lot of pointing and clicking. That was very easy.

Taking it to production was a lot harder. It was a lift to get the data loaded into Azure Cosmos DB. At the time, there were about 750,000 resumes that we uploaded for a customer, so it took a lot of time. We had to build a custom app to load those documents on data records into Azure Cosmos DB. We had two people working on it for two weeks. We probably spent somewhere around 60 hours around the lift to get that all loaded up and going in Azure Cosmos DB.

It took us about 18 months to feel fully confident in working with this and reach a level where we can go and teach others. We feel that we have got a firm grasp of the service after about 18 months of production support.

Its maintenance has been taken care of by Microsoft. However, at the end of last year going into this year, there were a few disruptions with the service that hampered our customers or users. There have been times when the service went down, or the service was upgraded but the SDK or NuGet packages used to support or connect to Azure Cosmos DB were not in sync. Overall, Microsoft takes care of the maintenance.

It was all done in-house. We had two people involved in it, myself and my lead developer. It was mainly about loading data into Azure Cosmos DB. That was a big lift.

Azure Cosmos DB helped decrease our organization’s total cost of ownership. It is hard to provide the numbers, but managing the data store is easier for us with Azure Cosmos DB with the MongoDB API because there is no need for a DBA. We do not have a DBA on the team who is just taking care of the indexes and making sure that the database is healthy. It pretty much just runs. If we had a DBA in the team specifically for MongoDB, we would be paying about 150,000 dollars a year. We have to somewhere in the neighborhood of 50,000 dollars for the service in Azure. In terms of the total cost of ownership, it saves us about 100,000 dollars.

Pricing, at times, is not super clear because they use the request unit (RU) model. To manage not just Azure Cosmos DB but what you are receiving for the dollars paid is not easy. It is very abstract. They could do a better job of connecting Azure Cosmos DB with the value or some variation of that. 

Overall, I would rate Azure Cosmos DB an eight out of ten.

I use Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for data engineering.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is fast, and its performance is good compared to normal SQL DB.

Sometimes, the solution's access request takes time, which should be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for one year.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a stable solution.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a scalable solution. More than 100 users use the solution in our organization.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's deployment time depends on how complex the job is. Learning-wise, it takes a few weeks to get your hands on, and then you can get started from there. The solution was implemented through an in-house team in our organization.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB to other users.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB a seven out of ten.

We handle JSON data and it is compatible with Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB. 

I have found Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB different from other SQL databases like RDBMS. It is non-SQL and helps to manage and manipulate data from the coding, rather than direct data and complex queries. It is quite flexible and offers a complete concentration on the coding part only. Even if one lacks expertise in complex queries, JSON and Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB are quite compatible with each other and makes the database options more enhanced and easy to operate. The additional SQL features allow you to go to Azure's portal and get the queries solved. 

I have been a devoted Microsoft fan, but Redis DB's memory caching capabilities are really making progress. Even if Cosmos DB is continuously improving and is quite advanced in the field of internal memory optimization, I would still recommend Redis DB to a customer. My dilemma still lies in the price of both solutions. I believe if Redis DB is superior and pricier than Cosmos DB, customers will be reluctant to use Redis DB.  

Memory streaming and various optimizations contribute to higher costs but also increased speed. Currently, there's nothing specific I can pinpoint that needs to be added – I haven't made any purchases yet. However, I am inclined to recommend working with it. 

I have worked with Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for one year.

It is a stable solution. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

We haven’t faced any issues that would make us contact service support or raise tickets

Positive

The solution's initial setup is easy. The deployment took almost one day. We migrated the services from the CRM system, converted them into JSON, and deployed it. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. 

If a customer needs to store JSON data, and the solution doesn't require complex structure and reporting like BI reports and RDBMS, opting for a NoSQL database could be ideal. NoSQL databases are suitable when data isn't structured in a relational manner and when extensive normalization isn't a priority. For efficiently handling JSON data for UI purposes or other needs, a NoSQL database like Cosmos DB is the way to go.

However, in the NoSQL landscape, various options like Redis DB, CouchDB, MongoDB, and Cosmos DB exist. If a preference leans towards Microsoft technologies, then Cosmos DB becomes a logical choice. Comparing Cosmos DB with alternatives like Redis DB is advisable before making a final decision. Thus, my typical recommendation involves considering these factors.

I would Cosmos DB a nine out of ten.

At the end of the day, Cosmos DB is a database. It is a wrapper over different APIs.

We use Cosmos DB both internally and with our customers. Our internal use is quite extensive. The usage with our customers depends on whether it is an approved technology within their ecosystem.

Because Cosmos DB uses multiple APIs, it is the go-to database for us internally.

Cosmos DB makes life easier because if we want to use Mongo-type data, or Cassandra-type data, or maybe even just a simple cable storage-type data, then graph, there are multiple ways to do this. With Cosmos DB, we can put together a holistic solution when it comes to Azure security policies, Azure Monitor, and access control.

By design, Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB provides multiple APIs. You have to decide where to write to. Will you write to Excel, Word, PPT, or OneNote? You have to do the homework properly. If there is no tool, then there will be no provision, then there is no database.

I would like to see Cosmos DB introduce a feature that would convert machine language to human-readable queries. For example, if we want to generate a simple diagram that shows the relationship between devices and how frequently have they failed at various locations, we have to consider that the IoT data that is put into Cosmos DB, called byte codes, is not readable to humans. This is a machine language type of data. So when we push that type of data it looks like gibberish, because it is not meant for us, meaning we can't write a normal query. We have been asking for years for them to work with the IoT partner to provide a feature to convert the machine language to readable human queries.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for three years.

The solution is stable. I would give it a five out of five for reliability.

The architectural decisions will tell you how the scaling will happen. 

Scalability is based on the requirements that are set. Configuration decisions can be implemented pretty fast, so the solution scales well. We are predominantly in the US and India, so it is easy to decide which geographies we need to have and which data we need to synchronize. 

For some of our customers, there are data residency rules like the UAE for example, where patient data must stay within the UAE, making it only one geography. When this is the case, we go for multiple replicas. 

Internally, we have more than 150 developers who use Cosmos DB. Overall, the scalability of the solution is a five out of five.

Product support is pretty good. They have a very good roadmap and the team provides regular patches and regular service updates, and they have a very good release plan.

Microsoft's technical support is good, I rate it a five out of five.

Positive

The initial setup depends on the type of setup you require. You have to design it properly. The architects need to do some homework to ensure the purpose and the requirements are clear. There are many design decisions that must be made first. Once those decisions are made, the initial setup is quite easy. 

Deployment of the solution was completed within a week.

Overall, I would give the solution a four out of five for ease of setup.

The deployment of Cosmos DB was completed internally, we managed it ourselves.

The cost is intricate, the calculator is complex because the cloud is all about counting every penny. It may look like small numbers, $0.001 per GB per day, but when we are talking of terabytes of data per day and the numbers will stack up. One month, we had over 500 terabytes. That's why you need a database expert to design it carefully and spend ample time number crunching. If done properly, the ROI will be good.

I would rate Cosmos DB a four out of five in terms of ROI.

Cosmos DB is expensive compared to any virtual machine based on conventional RDBMS like MySQL or PostgreSQL. The reason it is expensive is that it is scalable, reliable and there is no latency. So while Cosmos DB is considered expensive, what a lot of people miss is that the cost includes reliability, scalability, and responsiveness.

Cost also depends on the number of databases, number of replica locations, synchronization, number of queries per minute, and storage. Every client will have a different usage pattern. 

Overall, I would rate Cosmos DB a three out of five in terms of affordability. It is easy to over-provision, and it is easy to under-provision the solution.

Prior to choosing Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB, we did try other tools extensively. Because we have servers, we tried MongoDB, SQL Server, MySQL, and PostgreSQL. We settled on Cosmos DB internally because we didn't want to go for machines and trojaning. We wanted to adopt a platform as a service.  

Cost also ended up being a driving factor.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB a 10 out of 10.

We have a massive quantity of data that we need to maintain, and we can't put it in a relational database since we need all of the data and want it to be queried quickly.

We maintain it in non-relational databases such as Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

It's not a specific feature that I value, but the scalability of this system is the most impressive aspect.

The UI should be improved since if you provide the option to query directly when signing into the Azure portal, it makes no sense if you have such a poor UI for querying that you can't even feed the reports correctly. 

It should offer a simple user interface for querying Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for a long time, almost forever.

We are always working with the latest version.

It's fairly stable. I have no complaints about the stability of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is fully scalable.

Users do not connect to Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB directly. Our APIs connect to Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB and are then used by the front end. 

Estimating the number of users is impossible.

Because our complete setup is in Microsoft, we have access to the most premium Microsoft assistance, available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We have never had a problem with technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The RU's use case determines our license fees. It fluctuates based on how many RUs we have. It's not a fixed-line.

Because our whole solution was hosted on Azure, this was the default option for us. We didn't look into any other possibilities.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB a seven out of ten.

We are streaming some data from Azure Stream Analytics, which will be stored in Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB. Our application will be taken from Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB.

The solution's most valuable feature is its global distribution. We work globally and currently have Azure operating in fire regions. From a global distribution perspective, Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is good and easy to handle. Since Microsoft handles the solution's main operation, we don't have many headaches regarding its operation.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB for more than 2 years.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a stable solution.

I got instant technical support from Microsoft during an outage issue.

Positive

We use Terraform scripts for the initial setup of the solution, which doesn't take much time.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. We select which region to host Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB based on the resource group. We use Terraform scripts in the deployment process. We create a database and a document inside the database.

The solution is pretty good in terms of support, but we have some pricing issues with it. We are currently evaluating MongoDB and Apache Cassandra. Apart from the pricing, we didn't face any issues with the solution. We once faced an outage issue with Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB because some back-end updates from Microsoft changed the settings.

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a cloud-based solution. Based on our experience, the solution is pretty good because we operate in multiple regions. There will be a lot of machines sending IoT data, dashboards, and alarm messages. Customers need to be updated simultaneously, which should not take much time. The solution's processing is pretty good.

I would recommend the solution to other users. The solution's usage is pretty good, but users should be careful about the IO threshold value, which is a little bit high.

Overall, I rate the solution eight and a half out of ten.