3 ms·
Don’t know if this is still the case, but I always felt more nickled and dimed on Azure (than AWS). For example, the base SKU for their managed PostgreSQL compa
by selimnairb 5y ago
Don’t know if this is still the case, but I always felt more nickled and dimed on Azure (than AWS). For example, the base SKU for their managed PostgreSQL compatible service did not allow use in a VPC/behind a DMZ. You had to pay substantially more for the mid level SKU. This was not the case with AWS’s equivalent service.
- selimnairb 5y agoAlso, I may have missed something, but cloning VMs in Azure used to be (still is?) a destructive process. WTF?
- MBCook 5y agoHow could it possibly be a destructive process? Do you mean like cloning VM A destroys it and creates identical VMs B and C?
- selimnairb 5y agoI think what was happening was, if you wanted to make a VM image (which you could then later clone to new instances), it would result in the original VM (i.e., the source of the image) being no longer usable.
- nsatya_msft 5y agoDid you try Azure Flexible server offering for PostgreSQL? It is in preview and addresses this exact issue.
- selimnairb 5y agoNo, I haven’t used Azure since changing jobs two years ago. Thanks for the heads up.