http://mschnlnine.vo.llnwd.net/d1/Dev/App_Themes/C9/images/feedimage.pnghttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/The Future of SQL Data Services with Nigel Ellishttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/en-usThu, 30 Apr 2009 03:34:34 GMTThu, 30 Apr 2009 03:34:34 GMTEvNet (EvNet, Version=1.0.3608.3122, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null)&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;How will (if it will) the filestream type work.<BR>FILESTREAM (see <A href="http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb933993.aspx">http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb933993.aspx</A>) will not be supported in SDS v1.&nbsp;&nbsp; There are some unique challenges with supporting this in our SDS cluster environment.&nbsp;&nbsp; We are however considering building a SQL RBS provider (see <A href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc905212.aspx">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc905212.aspx</A>) that would allow you to store blob data within Windows Azure and manage link level consistency from within SQL Data Services.<BR><BR>Nigel.http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467420Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:34:34 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4674200http://channel9.msdn.com/467420/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;How will (if it will) the filestream type work.FILESTREAM (see http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb933993.aspx) will not be supported in SDS v1.&nbsp;&nbsp; There are some unique challenges with supporting this in our SDS cluster environment.&nbsp;&nbsp; We are however&#8230;Nigel Ellis0http://channel9.msdn.com/467420/Trackback.aspx<P>&gt; Are you planning to charge for the total consumed space (data and indexes), or table&nbsp;pages only?<BR>The exact billing model is still under discussion.&nbsp; The size caps would apply to the physical database size so it would include all indexes defined.<BR><BR>&gt; Are you planning to offer space compression by any chance?<BR>This is not currently in scope for our initial release.<BR><BR>Nigel.</P>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467418Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:31:13 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4674180http://channel9.msdn.com/467418/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0&gt; Are you planning to charge for the total consumed space (data and indexes), or table&nbsp;pages only?The exact billing model is still under discussion.&nbsp; The size caps would apply to the physical database size so it would include all indexes defined.&gt; Are you planning to offer space&#8230;Nigel Ellis0http://channel9.msdn.com/467418/Trackback.aspxOne other question.&nbsp; How will (if it will) the filestream type work.&nbsp; Normaly this stores it outside the database in normal NTFS.&nbsp; In the cloud would you have some kind of Azure Blob Storage that would store these files?&nbsp; Would they count twords the 10gig max on SDS?http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467240Wed, 29 Apr 2009 04:57:12 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4672400http://channel9.msdn.com/467240/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0One other question.&nbsp; How will (if it will) the filestream type work.&nbsp; Normaly this stores it outside the database in normal NTFS.&nbsp; In the cloud would you have some kind of Azure Blob Storage that would store these files?&nbsp; Would they count twords the 10gig max on SDS?cdwatkins0http://channel9.msdn.com/467240/Trackback.aspxNigel,<BR>10GB of "pure" data may sound like a reasonable starting point, but if the data are moderately indexed, the space would run out much-much faster.<BR><BR>Are you planning to charge for the total consumed space (data and indexes), or table&nbsp;pages only?<BR><BR>Are you planning to offer space compression by any chance?<BR><BR>Seva.http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467217Wed, 29 Apr 2009 01:03:19 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4672170http://channel9.msdn.com/467217/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0Nigel,10GB of "pure" data may sound like a reasonable starting point, but if the data are moderately indexed, the space would run out much-much faster.Are you planning to charge for the total consumed space (data and indexes), or table&nbsp;pages only?Are you planning to offer space compression by any chance?Seva.sokhaty0http://channel9.msdn.com/467217/Trackback.aspx<P>For all of the mortals out there (like myself) here is a link to some information about SQL Server 2008 Concurrency which essentials deals with how the SQL Server handles locking.<BR><A href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189132.aspx">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189132.aspx</A></P> <P>Buzza, is there a particular situation unique to the Cloud that you are concerned about related to Concurrency?<BR></P>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467189Tue, 28 Apr 2009 22:36:30 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4671890http://channel9.msdn.com/467189/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0For all of the mortals out there (like myself) here is a link to some information about SQL Server 2008 Concurrency which essentials deals with how the SQL Server handles locking.http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189132.aspx Buzza, is there a particular situation unique to the Cloud that&#8230;Zach Skyles Owens0http://channel9.msdn.com/467189/Trackback.aspxReally good.&nbsp; Thanks Nigel and great questions Zach.&nbsp; Am&nbsp;very happy to see move to TDS.&nbsp; I never could really bite into the soap SDS thing&nbsp;when I played with it, as simple actually became complicated because the model did not allow enouph flex.&nbsp; This new model will be great and being able to use SSMS makes so much sense and people will just get it.&nbsp; I also love the seemless integration with Astoria as&nbsp;it gives you a nice remote compute ability and rest.&nbsp; IMHO, large blob storage should be totally abstracted by the system.&nbsp; So a large varbinary(max) should just be stored in blob storage as needed and dev should not even know or care - it just appears as a varbinary and not counted in your 10GB (but maybe as table storage).&nbsp; I think a natural model is pay-to-play in terms of storage above 10GB.<BR><BR>I also would vote for easy tenant virtualization in terms of applications.&nbsp; So I make a cloud app, but I need&nbsp;to support X different customers.&nbsp;&nbsp; I need each tenant/customer "virtualized" (and seperate)&nbsp;without having to update my tables and queries to support tenant IDs.&nbsp; All my queries "route" to proper virtual db based on login id.&nbsp; This would abstract uneeded complexity I think.http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=467040Tue, 28 Apr 2009 05:13:44 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4670400http://channel9.msdn.com/467040/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0Really good.&nbsp; Thanks Nigel and great questions Zach.&nbsp; Am&nbsp;very happy to see move to TDS.&nbsp; I never could really bite into the soap SDS thing&nbsp;when I played with it, as simple actually became complicated because the model did not allow enouph flex.&nbsp; This new model will be&#8230;William Stacey0http://channel9.msdn.com/467040/Trackback.aspx<P>I agree there are cases where large databases are required.&nbsp; Your example of Exchange backup (or other backup scenario) is a case for large blob data.&nbsp; This is something supported using Azure blob storage - we will also be investigating supporting the SQL Server RBS interface which would allow seamless storage of large blobs alongside your structured data.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 10GB of structured data is a great deal of information and covers our initial target application segments which shows most applications have databases in the order of &lt; 3GB in size.<BR><BR>Remember any limits are just a starting point not an end.<BR><BR>Thanks,<BR>Nigel.</P>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=466994Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:27:20 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4669940http://channel9.msdn.com/466994/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0I agree there are cases where large databases are required.&nbsp; Your example of Exchange backup (or other backup scenario) is a case for large blob data.&nbsp; This is something supported using Azure blob storage - we will also be investigating supporting the SQL Server RBS interface which would&#8230;Nigel Ellis0http://channel9.msdn.com/466994/Trackback.aspxBuzza, for concurrently we have the same mechanism available to you as SQL Server.&nbsp;&nbsp; SQL support optimistic (timestamps or value comparisions) or pessimistic concurrency models.&nbsp; The presence of the Cloud doesn't change the model at all.<BR><BR>Nigel.http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=466993Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:23:26 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4669930http://channel9.msdn.com/466993/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0Buzza, for concurrently we have the same mechanism available to you as SQL Server.&nbsp;&nbsp; SQL support optimistic (timestamps or value comparisions) or pessimistic concurrency models.&nbsp; The presence of the Cloud doesn't change the model at all.Nigel.Nigel Ellis0http://channel9.msdn.com/466993/Trackback.aspx10 Gigs really?&nbsp; I mean I have used 2TB databases. I think you will find people will really need at least 100 Gigs.&nbsp; Consiter something like Exchange backup&nbsp;where you got all kinds of emails and attachments being stored.&nbsp; Something like that NEEDS a large database cap.&nbsp; And the cop out of saying well you can create a bunch of little databases doesnt work as you cant run cross-database queries.http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=466992Mon, 27 Apr 2009 23:14:17 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4669920http://channel9.msdn.com/466992/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=010 Gigs really?&nbsp; I mean I have used 2TB databases. I think you will find people will really need at least 100 Gigs.&nbsp; Consiter something like Exchange backup&nbsp;where you got all kinds of emails and attachments being stored.&nbsp; Something like that NEEDS a large database cap.&nbsp; And&#8230;cdwatkins0http://channel9.msdn.com/466992/Trackback.aspx<P>Is there any type of concurrency manager in the cloud ? </P>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=466985Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:09:45 GMThttp://channel9.msdn.com/posts/ZachSkylesOwens/The-Future-of-SQL-Data-Services-with-Nigel-Ellis/?CommentID=4669850http://channel9.msdn.com/466985/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0Is there any type of concurrency manager in the cloud ? Buzza0http://channel9.msdn.com/466985/Trackback.aspx