[nosefrog]

Yup, the hardest part about migrating to Azure was jumping between all the managed services that work everywhere else but are insanely buggy on Azure. We ended up with the most basic architecture you can imagine (other than AKS, which works great as long as you don't use any plugins) and we're still running into issues.

We have a very long list of Azure features and services that we've banned people from using.

Just got off a call with someone at Azure today who told us to setup our own NAT gateway instead of using Azure's because of an outage where we made too many requests and then got our NAT Gateway quota taken away for the next 2 hours.

[cj]

To be fair AWS also has quotas on NAT Gateways.

Maximum 55k concurrent connections. After that, they make you deploy NAT gateways in other availability zones. And a max throughput of 10 Gbps.

I imagine AWS would also tell you to deploy your own gateway if you were running into the 55k concurrent connection limit of managed NAT.

AWS tends to be flexible with their quota enforcement in my experience, though.

[nosefrog]

Yea, I don't have a problem with the quota, more that the "out of quota" throttling lasts 2+ hours even after the traffic spike dies down.

[motorest]

> Yup, the hardest part about migrating to Azure was jumping between all the managed services that work everywhere else but are insanely buggy on Azure.

Care to point out a concrete example? I've worked with Azure a few years ago and I wouldn't describe it as buggy. At most, I accuse them of not "getting" cloud as well as AWS. For example, the whole concept of a function app is ass-backwards, vs just deploying a Lambda with a specific capacity. That is mainly a reflection of having more years working with AWS, though.