"The minimum recommended Azure SQL Tier is "S2", however noticeable performance improvements are seen in higher Tiers"
There's nothing stated about the associated site load, is this being suggested for even low traffic sites?
We're considering starting with S2 app service plan and hoping we can get away with below S2 single model pricing for each site database.
It's difficult to compare the Azure plans with our current cloud provider. Currently both IIS and SQL server are hosted on one VM with 6 vCPUs and 8GB RAM, which is probably overkill. Azure S2 app service plan states 2 vCPUs and 3.5 GB RAM for roughly the same price, while the database plans are specified in DTUs.
If anyone has experience here we'd greatly appreciate any input.
The level that you need will be dependent on exactly how your website is coded up but I have found that a basic low traffic Umbraco website can get away with a very low SQL pricing tier.
Our development and UAT sites are able to run on the Basic plan (5DTUs) with our production sites running on either S0 (10DTUs) or S1 (20DTs). In normal running, Umbraco is not a very database intensive app.
The best advice is to simply monitor usage one you have migrated, you can always increase or decrease the resources allocated to the site. Of cause the more you add the more performance you will get but this might not be noticeable to a user. The monitors in Azure offer really good insights to what your app is using.
You app service plan and SQL pricing tier are not linked so you need to consider each separately. I believe the S2 tier is recommended for your app service plan only but again you might be able to get away with a lower tier depending on how demanding your site is.
Azure SQL recommended minimum resource/pricing tiers
Hello all
We're migrating some low traffic sites to Azure web apps and looking for recommendations for minimum resource/pricing plans.
So far all I've found is this:
https://our.umbraco.com/documentation/getting-started/setup/server-setup/azure-web-apps
"The minimum recommended Azure SQL Tier is "S2", however noticeable performance improvements are seen in higher Tiers"
There's nothing stated about the associated site load, is this being suggested for even low traffic sites?
We're considering starting with S2 app service plan and hoping we can get away with below S2 single model pricing for each site database.
It's difficult to compare the Azure plans with our current cloud provider. Currently both IIS and SQL server are hosted on one VM with 6 vCPUs and 8GB RAM, which is probably overkill. Azure S2 app service plan states 2 vCPUs and 3.5 GB RAM for roughly the same price, while the database plans are specified in DTUs.
If anyone has experience here we'd greatly appreciate any input.
Hi Aaron,
The level that you need will be dependent on exactly how your website is coded up but I have found that a basic low traffic Umbraco website can get away with a very low SQL pricing tier.
Our development and UAT sites are able to run on the Basic plan (5DTUs) with our production sites running on either S0 (10DTUs) or S1 (20DTs). In normal running, Umbraco is not a very database intensive app.
The best advice is to simply monitor usage one you have migrated, you can always increase or decrease the resources allocated to the site. Of cause the more you add the more performance you will get but this might not be noticeable to a user. The monitors in Azure offer really good insights to what your app is using.
You app service plan and SQL pricing tier are not linked so you need to consider each separately. I believe the S2 tier is recommended for your app service plan only but again you might be able to get away with a lower tier depending on how demanding your site is.
Paul
Thanks Paul that's helpful.
I did expect a case of trial and error but it's always helpful to hear from someone in the trenches.
As you say I didn't think Umbraco was very db intensive during normal operation once all the content is cached.
is working on a reply...