Single-entity partitions in Azure Table
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In an Azure table, having smaller partitions helps with load balancing Azure Table service. In my use case, there is no dependency between individual entities, whether I retrieve them or (re)write them. I am considering having single-entity partitions (that is, each partition would have one entity).
There is nothing I can find in Microsoft documentation (basically, Table Storage Design Guide and further literature referenced there) that would indicate down sides of this approach for my use case. I wonder if anyone here has had negative experience with this or similar approach. Thank you!
azure-table-storage asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In an Azure table, having smaller partitions helps with load balancing Azure Table service. In my use case, there is no dependency between individual entities, whether I retrieve them or (re)write them. I am considering having single-entity partitions (that is, each partition would have one entity).
There is nothing I can find in Microsoft documentation (basically, Table Storage Design Guide and further literature referenced there) that would indicate down sides of this approach for my use case. I wonder if anyone here has had negative experience with this or similar approach. Thank you!
azure-table-storage asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
In an Azure table, having smaller partitions helps with load balancing Azure Table service. In my use case, there is no dependency between individual entities, whether I retrieve them or (re)write them. I am considering having single-entity partitions (that is, each partition would have one entity).
There is nothing I can find in Microsoft documentation (basically, Table Storage Design Guide and further literature referenced there) that would indicate down sides of this approach for my use case. I wonder if anyone here has had negative experience with this or similar approach. Thank you!
azure-table-storage asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
In an Azure table, having smaller partitions helps with load balancing Azure Table service. In my use case, there is no dependency between individual entities, whether I retrieve them or (re)write them. I am considering having single-entity partitions (that is, each partition would have one entity).
There is nothing I can find in Microsoft documentation (basically, Table Storage Design Guide and further literature referenced there) that would indicate down sides of this approach for my use case. I wonder if anyone here has had negative experience with this or similar approach. Thank you!
azure-table-storage azure-table-storage asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
asked Nov 21 at 22:00
Simon Hawkin
10325
10325
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The only disadvantage of using single-entity partitions is that you can't leverage EntityGroupTransaction to insert/update entities in batch, which requires entities in the batch having the same Partition Key.
EntityGroupTransaction may achieve better performance than inserting/updating entities one by one, and operations within a batch are processed atomically.
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The only disadvantage of using single-entity partitions is that you can't leverage EntityGroupTransaction to insert/update entities in batch, which requires entities in the batch having the same Partition Key.
EntityGroupTransaction may achieve better performance than inserting/updating entities one by one, and operations within a batch are processed atomically.
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The only disadvantage of using single-entity partitions is that you can't leverage EntityGroupTransaction to insert/update entities in batch, which requires entities in the batch having the same Partition Key.
EntityGroupTransaction may achieve better performance than inserting/updating entities one by one, and operations within a batch are processed atomically.
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
The only disadvantage of using single-entity partitions is that you can't leverage EntityGroupTransaction to insert/update entities in batch, which requires entities in the batch having the same Partition Key.
EntityGroupTransaction may achieve better performance than inserting/updating entities one by one, and operations within a batch are processed atomically.
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
The only disadvantage of using single-entity partitions is that you can't leverage EntityGroupTransaction to insert/update entities in batch, which requires entities in the batch having the same Partition Key.
EntityGroupTransaction may achieve better performance than inserting/updating entities one by one, and operations within a batch are processed atomically.
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
answered Nov 22 at 2:06
Zhaoxing Lu - Microsoft
3,378621
3,378621
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
add a comment |
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
Thank you very much, Zhaoxing Lu, for a quick answer! I have accepted it. Indeed, my user case as well as expected future use cases would not involve entity group transactions. I plan to go with single entity partitions.
– Simon Hawkin
Nov 23 at 9:01
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53421056%2fsingle-entity-partitions-in-azure-table%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
