IBM Cloud Functions vs. Azure SQL Database

IBM Cloud Functions [is] not the worse product on the IBM cloud. I decided to write this review as I thought it would be balanced. I would still use functions to set up a serverless architecture where execution time is pretty quick and the code is relatively simple. I wouldn't use IBM Cloud Functions for async calls obviously, as costs could be higher. The functions documentation is lacking in terms of CI/CD, and there are unexplainable errors occurring - like the network connection that I mentioned. So I wouldn't just rely on IBM Cloud Functions too much for the entire system, but make sure it's diversified.

We have found it's a great alternative for making older legacy applications work with online databases instead of only on-premises databases. We've converted over a dozen applications this way, and it has allowed our clients to have a distributed workforce using their applications without incurring the expense of a complete application rewrite.

Incentivized

• Great substitute for a simple API calls to run non-complicated code.
• Easy way to run Python/Java/Javascript to get something done.
• File validation.

Incentivized

• Maintenance is always an issue, so using a cloud solution saves a lot of trouble.
• On premise solutions always suffer from fragmented implementations here and there, where several "dba's" keep track of security and maintenance. With a cloud database it's much easier to keep a central overview.
• Security options in SQL database are next level... data masking, hiding sensitive data where always neglected on premise, whereas you'll get this automatically in the cloud.

Incentivized

• Billing can be a hassle, not the most responsive customer service/support team
• Handles & executes most functionalities, but other platforms offer more scalability if you're seeking consistent and stable growth

Incentivized

• One needs to be aware that some T-SQL features are simply not available.
• The programmatic access to server, trace flags, hardware from within Azure SQL Database is taken away (for a good reason).
• No SQL Agent so your jobs need to be orchestrated differently.
• The maximum concurrent logins maybe an unexpected problem.
• Sudden disconnects.
• The developers and admin must study the capacity and tier usage limits https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-subscription-service-limits otherwise some errors or even transaction aborts never seen before can occur.
• Only one Latin Collation choice.
• There is no way to debug T-SQL ( a big drawback in my point of view).

Incentivized

This is best solution as a DBA one could expect from a service provider and as a cloud service, it removes all your hassles.

Incentivized

The interfaces are intuitive once you are familiar with all the functions. The ability to use different tools to interact with the platform, such as directly via a browser or code editors such as VS Code or Visual Studio is a great option and allows for integrating withn the project and other testing and developing tools.

Incentivized

We give the support a high rating simply because every time we've had issues or questions, representatives were in contact with us quickly. Without fail, our issues/questions were handled in a timely matter. That kind of response is integral when client data integrity and availability is in question. There is also a wealth of documentation for resolving issues on your own.

Incentivized

• ICF is a lightweight service and does not require runtime configurations
• Scalable on demand and hence there is no need to pay for runtime costs

Incentivized

We moved away from Oracle and NoSQL because we had been so reliant on them for the last 25 years, the pricing was too much and we were looking for a way to cut the cord. Snowflake is just too up in the air, feels like it is soon to be just another line item to add to your Azure subscription. Azure was just priced right, easy to migrate to and plenty of resources to hire to support/maintain it. Very easy to learn, too.

Incentivized

• It directly affected our expenses since we do not need to deploy and maintain a set of separate applications.
• It allowed us to pay for only the amount of time cloud functions run.
• It saved on maintenance and monitoring of the applications it replaced.

Incentivized

• Perfect for small and medium databases, being very cost effective.
• As a Platform as a Service, there is no concern about patches, upgrades and end of life.
• Be aware of security and network capabilities. The service cannot run in the VNET as Azure Virtual Machines do.