Share your experience using Oracle Messaging Cloud Service

Microsoft Azure is a ticketing system that provides support services to Microsoft partners based on their partnership tier. Partners can raise support tickets, particularly for production-related issues. When we had issues with our Cosmos DB instance in production, we would submit a support ticket with screenshots detailing the error. We usually receive a call from a support engineer the same day.

Once a support engineer was assigned, the process was well-organized. Each engineer worked shifts of about eight to nine hours, and before their shift ended, they would email us to let us know who would be taking over, for example, "John Doe." They would also provide a summary of the issue, progress made, and next steps, ensuring a smooth handover without the need to re-explain the problem to the next engineer. It was a very efficient process.

Microsoft Fabric is a new service that integrates various functionalities into one platform, such as data engineering, data science, and data visualization. While promising, some complexities and limitations become apparent only after you use the service.

Fabric is a comprehensive and expensive service with tier-based pricing. For someone new to the platform, like those coming from Snowflake or Databricks, it can be difficult to grasp the cost implications and potential limitations without extensive exploration. The documentation outlines these limitations.

Pricing is very expensive.

I have been using Microsoft Azure for five years.

Cosmos DB offered better scalability. In Azure SQL, we had to carefully manage the storage tier, switching back and forth based on needs. But when we first implemented Cosmos DB, we had a good understanding of the required data volume over the past three months. This helped us select the appropriate tier because we had those figures.

If we had done it the other way around, it would have been much harder to estimate the data accurately. While you can get a rough idea, whether it works out in practice is more of a hit-and-miss approach, which we have already experienced with Cosmos DB. We applied the knowledge gained from that exercise to build a similar solution over Azure SQL.

On the DevOps side, our team consisted of five members, ranging from senior to junior roles. We would raise requests for specific services needed in the development environment. The process typically takes three to five business days, including all necessary approvals, from submitting the request to receiving the resources and verifying access.

Sometimes, even with the documentation available, understanding how it applies to our specific issues requires contacting a system engineer and creating a support ticket. The support engineer often provided additional details that were not included in the official documentation. This highlights the gap between the provided information and practical, real-world use cases.

Positive

Deployment was relatively straightforward. We didn’t encounter any issues whether we were using the GUI mode or working with our DevOps team, who utilized Terraform to provision resources as needed.

Most people use Azure Synapse for data onboarding and integration. Synapse is a big data analytics platform where data engineers and scientists can collaborate on a unified platform. Another service called API Management serves data outside Azure to downstream consumers or third parties. This is useful for cases where third parties can't be onboarded onto your system due to compliance or regulatory issues or need a specific slice of your data in near real-time. When we used Cosmos DB, we hosted near real-time data with a latency of about 15 minutes and served it via API M. With API M, authentication tokens were shared with the end users, allowing us to know precisely who was consuming data outside of our Azure environment. This setup was unique because it required providing near real-time information with minimal latency, even as the number of concurrent users increased. Cosmos DB worked well in this scenario due to its horizontal scalability. We also hosted similar data on Azure SQL, as Cosmos DB can be more expensive for cases where a smaller amount of data needed to be served, such as just the last one to three months of data. Azure SQL was a good alternative. The same API M interface was used to serve data from Cosmos DB and Azure SQL. Under the hood, one API would fetch data from Cosmos DB, and another would pull from Azure SQL. This architecture was tested and worked well for our client.

It was easy to maintain. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten,

My main use case for Netlify Platform is hosting my self projects and websites, specifically static websites.

A quick example of a project I have hosted using Netlify Platform is when I was learning React and created a website for that purpose.

I may explore other types of projects or features in the future.

The best features Netlify Platform offers include the ease of hosting a website and checking how it looks to users.

What makes the hosting and preview process easy for me with Netlify Platform is the ease of use.

Netlify Platform has positively impacted my learning by simplifying the learning curve. When I was learning React and wanted to create and test a website, hosting through Netlify helped me in my learning journey.

Netlify Platform can be improved for dynamic websites, as I can host static sites but not completely dynamic sites, which could be enhanced.

Potential improvements could involve integrations or performance enhancements.

I am still exploring the platform and may discover additional improvements as I continue.

I have been using Netlify Platform for one year.

Netlify Platform is stable.

Netlify Platform's scalability is good.

The customer support for Netlify Platform is good.

Positive

I did not previously use a different solution.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing with Netlify Platform is that pricing is a bit higher and could be reduced.

I did not purchase Netlify Platform through AWS Marketplace.

I have seen a return on investment as time has been saved in hosting the website.

Pricing is a bit higher and could be reduced.

If I were to use GitHub Pages or something similar, it would be comparatively less useful and harder to host compared to Netlify Platform. Before choosing Netlify Platform, I did not evaluate other options.

My advice for others looking into using Netlify Platform is that it is a good platform; there is some learning involved, but once completed, it proves to be a good choice. I would rate this review a 7 out of 10.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)