SQL Azure 联合定价
如果我有一个 1GB 数据库，每月费用为 10 美元。如果我建立联盟，例如我有 5 个联盟，是否仍然每月 10 美元，还是每个联盟花费 10 美元（总计 50 美元）？
如果是前者更好，因为我可以为每个租户（客户端）建立一个联合，并随着更多客户端注册而增加数据库大小。
If I have a single 1gb database it costs $10 per month. If I set up federations, so for example I have 5 federations, is it still $10 per month or does each federation cost $10 ($50 total) ?
If it is the former that is better as I can just have a single federation per tenant (client) and increase the database size as more clients sign up.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
通过联盟，您可以跨多个联盟成员扩展您的应用程序。每个联盟成员都是一个 SQL Azure 数据库，并且可以像您现在对数据库所做的那样在最大大小和 SKU（Web/企业）方面进行控制。例如，您可以选择扩展到大量小型 1 GB 数据库，或更少的 10 GB 数据库。
在 SQL Azure 中，您将根据系统中使用的所有数据库的集合按比例按天付费。对于联盟，同样的逻辑适用；联盟的成本是其联盟成员的集合（+根数据库，可以是任何普通数据库）。
With Federations, you can scale your application out across multiple federation members. Each federation member is a SQL Azure database and can be controlled as you can do with your databases today in terms of max size and SKU (web/business). You can choose to scale out to lots of small 1 GB databases, or fewer 10 GB databases for example.
In SQL Azure, you get billed on the collection of all databases you use in the system prorated to a day. In the case of federations, the same logic apply; the cost of the federation is the collection of its federation members (+ the root database which can be any normal database).
联邦目前还没有正式的定价；然而，由于您本质上是在创建新的数据库，因此为每个联盟成员付费似乎是合适的。
There is no formal pricing on Federations just yet; however since you are essentially creating new databases, it would seem appropriate to expect to pay for each federated member.
到目前为止，答案都是猜测。
建立联合的要点之一是您只需为实际使用的数据库付费。根据我的理解，在 SaaS 实施中，例如单个数据库中有 100 个联合，应该只对一个数据库收费。这允许有效地扩展成本。
The answers here so far have been conjecture.
One of the main points of having the federation is that you only get charged for the actual databases being used. From my understanding, in a SaaS implementation for example with 100 federations in a single database there should ony be the charge for one database. This allows for scaling out cost effectively.