This session covers the variety of compute options available in Azure and examines the factors that need to be considered when choosing between them. Presented at the 2017 Global Azure Bootcamp
2. I N T H I S S E S S I O N
WHY DO WE EVEN NEED THIS SESSION
DECISION CRITERIA
AZURE COMPUTE SERVICES TOUR
WORKED EXAMPLES: WHAT SERVICE IS RIGHT FOR ME
Q & A
7. Balance of
responsibility
Balance of control and responsibility
depends on the category of the service
MOVE-IN READY
Use immediately with minimal configuration
SOME ASSEMBLY REQUIRED
Existing services are a starting point, with additional
configuration for a custom fit
BUILD FROM THE GROUND UP
Building blocks, create your own solution or apps
from scratch
Responsibility On-Prem IaaS PaaS SaaS
Applications
Data
Runtime
Middleware
O/S
Virtualization
Servers
Storage
Networking
MicrosoftCustomer
8. Platform Services
Infrastructure Services
Web
Apps
Mobile
Apps
API
Apps
Notification
Hubs
Hybrid
Cloud
Backup
StorSimple
Azure Site
Recovery
Import/Export
SQL
Database DocumentDB
Redis
Cache
Azure
Search
Storage
Tables
SQL Data
Warehouse
Azure AD
Health Monitoring
AD Privileged
Identity
Management
Operational
Analytics
Cloud
Services
Batch
RemoteApp
Service
Fabric
Visual Studio
Application
Insights
VS Team Services
Domain Services
HDInsight Machine
Learning Stream Analytics
Data
Factory
Event
Hubs
Data Lake
Analytics Service
IoT Hub
Data
Catalog
Security &
Management
Azure Active
Directory
Multi-Factor
Authentication
Automation
Portal
Key Vault
Store/
Marketplace
VM Image Gallery
& VM Depot
Azure AD
B2C
Scheduler
Xamarin
HockeyApp
Power BI
Embedded
SQL Server
Stretch Database
Mobile
Engagement
Functions
Cognitive Services Bot Framework Cortana
Security Center
Container
Service
VM
Scale Sets
Data Lake Store
BizTalk
Services
Service Bus
Logic
Apps
API
Management
Content
Delivery
Network
Media
Services
Media
Analytics
9. Platform Services
Infrastructure Services
Web
Apps
Mobile
Apps
API
Apps
Notification
Hubs
Hybrid
Cloud
Backup
StorSimple
Azure Site
Recovery
Import/Export
SQL
Database DocumentDB
Redis
Cache
Azure
Search
Storage
Tables
SQL Data
Warehouse
Azure AD
Health Monitoring
AD Privileged
Identity
Management
Operational
Analytics
Cloud
Services
Batch
RemoteApp
Service
Fabric
Visual Studio
Application
Insights
VS Team Services
Domain Services
HDInsight Machine
Learning Stream Analytics
Data
Factory
Event
Hubs
Data Lake
Analytics Service
IoT Hub
Data
Catalog
Security &
Management
Azure Active
Directory
Multi-Factor
Authentication
Automation
Portal
Key Vault
Store/
Marketplace
VM Image Gallery
& VM Depot
Azure AD
B2C
Scheduler
Xamarin
HockeyApp
Power BI
Embedded
SQL Server
Stretch Database
Mobile
Engagement
Functions
Cognitive Services Bot Framework Cortana
Security Center
Container
Service
VM
Scale Sets
Data Lake Store
BizTalk
Services
Service Bus
Logic
Apps
API
Management
Content
Delivery
Network
Media
Services
Media
Analytics
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17. Azure | Azure Stack
VM
Cloud
Services
VM Scale Sets
OpenShift
/ Pivotal CF
DC/OS
Swarm
Kubernetes
Azure
Container
Service
Azure
Batch
App Service
Web
App
Mobile
App
API App
Azure
Functions
Azure
Service
Fabric
21. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control High Either bring your own image or start with an Azure base and apply
extensions
OS choice High Any OS image supported in Azure can be used with a scale set
Operations (IT) portability Low VM lifecycle events, autoscale, OS patching are all tied to Azure
Dev productivity Low Fully flexible model – no golden paths
Dev learning curve Low No SDK – build apps mostly as you do today
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Flexible and unopinionated
Familiar to customers using core IaaS
No automated OS upgrades today
Limited developer primitives
24. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control Medium VMs are accessible but deployments that bypass the orchestrator are
not encouraged
OS choice Medium Predominantly Linux. Docker Swarm and Kubernetes have early stage
Windows support.
Operations (IT) portability Medium Orchestrator layer abstracts underlying compute for deployment and
management of apps
Scaling and OS updates require direct interaction with Azure
Dev productivity Medium Immutable containers allows for easy handoff to ops but no
guardrails
Dev learning curve Medium Write apps as you do today but you do need to learn container
packaging
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Best-of-breed container orchestration without the
hassle
Completely OSS
No automated OS upgrades today
No customer support for the orchestrators themselves
Product roadmap not owned by Microsoft
26. • Scales by cloning the app on multiple
servers/VMs/Containers
Monolithic application approach Microservices application approach
• A microservice application
separates functionality into
separate smaller services.
• Scales out by deploying each service
independently creating instances of these services
across servers/VMs/containers
• A monolith app contains domain
specific functionality and is
normally divided by functional
layers such as web, business and
data
App 1 App 2App 1
27. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control Medium VMs are accessible but deployments that bypass Service Fabric are
not encouraged
OS choice Medium Predominantly Windows. Linux support in preview (GA in H2 2017).
Operation (IT) portability Medium Orchestrator layer abstracts underlying compute for deployment and
management of apps
Scaling and OS updates require direct interaction with Azure
Dev productivity Medium APIs oriented towards building microservice apps in .NET
Dev learning curve High Large concept count required to truly harness the platform
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Opinionated microservices platform matured on
Windows
Support for stateful services
No automated OS upgrades today
Proprietary runtime
Current dev experience and platform collateral oriented
toward full buy-in
28.
29. • Languages and Framework
• Superior DevOps
• Self served
• App Diagnostics
Apps
Web Apps Mobile Apps
API Apps /
Management
Functions
eCommerce Digital Global Presence LOB API / Services / ISVCustom Apps
App Service
• Limitless/Auto Scale
• OS and Framework
• Load balance
• End-to-End Monitoring & Alerts
• Enterprise grade SLA
• Secure and Compliance
• On-Premise Connectivity
• Azure Active Directory Integration
30. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control N/A App Service is a fully managed service. You have no access to the VM
OS choice Medium App Service runs on Windows. Preview Linux containers support
Operations (IT) portability Low There is no operation portability. In migration customers will need to
redeploy their applications (one by one). All App lifecycle events,
autoscale, OS patching are all tied to Azure
Dev productivity High Reuse web development tools and knowledge
Dev learning curve Low No SDK – build apps mostly as you do today. Almost all web
applications/ frameworks just work
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Fully managed
High developer productivity
Enterprise grade applications
Multitenant (unless running on ASE)
No OS customization
VNET available only with ASE
Scale up to 20 VM in multitenant (up to 200 in ASE)
31.
32. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control N/A App Service is a fully managed service. You have no access to the VM
OS choice N/A Functions runs on Windows
Operations (IT) portability Low to N/A Today, you cant really migrate Functions
Dev productivity High Just right code and it works
Dev learning curve Low No SDK – build apps mostly as you do today. Almost all web
applications/ frameworks just work
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Serverless / Fully managed
Event base/ instant scale
High developer productivity
Multitenant (unless running on ASE)
No OS customization
VNET available only with ASE
33. Demo: Integrating with Non-Azure Services
Sentiment
Analysis
SMS Web Hook
Transform to JSON
Azure Function
Text AnalyticsLogic Apps
How do you feel?
34.
35.
36. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control Low Runs on standard black-box VM images known as ‘stemcells’
OS choice Medium Predominantly Linux. Windows support currently in preview.
IT portability High Scaling, OS patching, logging all handled through common PCF
constructs
Service broker enables provisioning and binding to Azure and 3rd
party services through common interface
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Cross-cloud consistency for dev and ops
Integrated with Spring framework for Java microservices
Requires additional license from Pivotal
Large minimum deployment (~50 VMs)
No infrastructure autoscale
37. Decision criteria Rating Notes
OS control Medium VMs are accessible but deployments that bypass orchestrator are not
encouraged
OS choice Low Linux only
IT portability Medium Orchestrator layer abstracts underlying compute for deployment and
management of apps
Scaling and OS updates require direct interaction with Azure
Core value proposition Key drawbacks
Supported version of Kubernetes orchestration with
enterprise tooling
Single vendor
OS upgrades are your responsibility
No infrastructure autoscale
38. • Cloud Services tightly linked an application model with the
underlying infrastructure
• Going forward, we are splitting those out for greater flexibility
• Infrastructure layer: VM Scale Sets
• Application Model: Many options already discussed
• Cloud Services will be supported indefinitely, but new investment
will be limited
39. Azure | Azure Stack
VM
Cloud
Services
VM Scale Sets
OpenShift
/ Pivotal CF
DC/OS
Swarm
Kubernetes
Azure
Container
Service
Azure
Batch
App Service
Web
App
Mobile
App
API App
Azure
Functions
Azure
Service
Fabric
46. Azure | Azure Stack
VM
Cloud
Services
VM Scale Sets
OpenShift
/ Pivotal CF
DC/OS
Swarm
Kubernetes
Azure
Container
Service
Azure
Batch
App Service
Web
App
Mobile
App
API App
Azure
Functions
Azure
Service
Fabric
Editor's Notes
Trends are not ubiquitous.There is no one-size-fits-all.
Trends are not ubiquitous.There is no one-size-fits-all.
Trends are not ubiquitous.There is no one-size-fits-all.