Azure Blob as File Storage for TF and DMS system.
January 20, 2026

Azure Blob as File Storage for TF and DMS system.

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Azure Blob Storage

We use it as file storage for our DMS solution, and the Terraform automation needs a container as state storage. So to speak, it addresses the crucial need for a reliable, cost-efficient, and reasonably fast storage. Both use cases have different needs (e.g., soft-delete options and locks to avoid conflicting changes), which are covered in the feature scope.

Pros

  • Offer configuration options e.g.: soft delete period, backups.
  • Price efficiency (compared to non object storage).
  • Availability (at least to my experience).

Cons

  • Sometimes the behavior is nondeterministic (e.g. compare config via UI vs. terraform).
  • While it does some things better than S3, the interoperability in a migration scenario seems cumbersome.
  • The number of features/config options is overwhelming; we found the docs, etc., a bit hard to read.
  • Regarding the migration from S3, we needed significant investment just to get it running, which was negative.
  • Once it ran and we could configure the soft delete more fine-grained, it helped us and had a positive impact.
  • The fact that even more features/options are available, could help us in the future.
Once we migrated to Azure Blob, there is not much we can complain about. So that is why we give it a positive rating, but because of some flaws (documentation, unexpected behavior, limited interoperability), there is room for improvement; set aside the things that are very hard or even impossible to improve. In addition, other aspects beyond this depend on the provider, so if your aim is not multi-cloud, a good file/object storage solution is not enough; if you are not impressed by the Kubernetes service, etc.
In our case, Blob storage was not the deciding factor in switching to the provider. It could have been a knockout criterion if Azure had no or an incompatible object storage (key attributes: reliable, cost-efficient, and reasonably fast), because Azure's internal alternatives do not work. As these were fulfilled or even overfulfilled (configuration options), the effort required to migrate was well justified, given the S3-based object storage.

Do you think Azure Blob Storage delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with Azure Blob Storage's feature set?

Yes

Did Azure Blob Storage live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Azure Blob Storage go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy Azure Blob Storage again?

Yes

In Azure, it is the storage to use, and in my view, the Blob Storage offers more, or finer-grained configuration options, than S3. So my recommendation would be to check in detail what is offered. As the Blob Storage is more or less a Microsoft exclusive product, the "interoperability" is more limited than, for example, with S3. The S3 is more widely adopted, and if you cannot exclude a migration scenario from one cloud provider to another, additional effort is needed.

Comments

More Reviews of Azure Blob Storage

  1. Home
  2. Object Storage Solutions
  3. Azure Blob Storage Reviews
  4. User Review of Azure Blob Storage