Hi all, I was wondering what is everyone's "go to" setup for hosting on Azure? Currently, the standard load balanced setup we usually we do is: - 3x Web Apps (

S2

) - 1x Backoffice editing app - 2x frontends that sit under Azure Application Gateway (WAFv2) - 2x Azure SQL (

S2

) (geo-redundant) - 1x Storage Account for blob storage (media & crops cache) This setup handles load very well, but is quite expensive (~£800 a month), and whilst it makes sense for the clients that need it, it absolutely does not make sense for smaller clients. I've seen people recommend the new Premium v3 service plan, specifically the

P0v3

, which looks to be on par/maybe better than the older

S2

tiers. (they're also a lot cheaper compared to

S2

) So my thinking is that these are two good options for more basic sites: - 1x Web App (

P0v3

) - which can be manually/automatically scaled up - (I know the backoffice / *SchedulingPublisher *server should NOT be scaled out, but scaling up *"should*" be ok?) or - 2x Web Apps (

P0v3

) - 1x backoffice edit app, not scaled - 1x frontend that can be scaled up/out. (with redis cache, or similar, if scaled out) Has anyone else used

P0v3

tier web apps for Umbraco?

Well it highly depends on the requirements I guess, and the complexion your site has I'm running my site (40K unique visitors/month) - B2 App Service for Live environment - 1x S1:20 DTU database - 1x Basic tier Test DB - 1x Basic tier Dev DB - Free tier App Service for Test - 1x storage account ~ 2000 content nodes ~ 20.000 media nodes For around 70€a/month 🙂

Oh yes definitely, I'm trying to think of a "minimum" setup. I usually use B1 tiers for dev/test apps, but I find Umbraco quite slow on them. How do you find the performance of the backoffice on a B2 for live?

how often are these sites updated .. you could go with publishing static files for smaller sites and reduce costs even more

For me it

runs like a train

(dutch expression, runs really good) We used to run on a B1, but when content / visitors grew it wasnt doable anymore

There was a package that helped you x site generator .. https://our.umbraco.com/packages/backoffice-extensions/xstatic/ its an old one but its sort of desrving of a v latest version.. and if i get time i might look at updating it.. but the idea is on publish generate some folder stick some html in them and bang you have website ( like we used to do in the old days.. 20 plus years etc

good to know, thanks 🙂

Nice, I like that expression! 😄 I've been using xStatic and Netlify, for my personal website, it's worked quite well!

Hey @Owain Jones Just rekindling this old thread after a Discord search for Azure 'P0v3' Did you go with that option? I'm just drawing up some hosting proposals and I would have usually gone with an S2, but noticed that the 'P0v3' was actually cheaper. No rush at all to reply 🙂

Damn! I didnt know you get so much discount if you fix it for 3 years!

I know right! I'm revising a few documents based on this 😅

Currently running on Basic tier.. wonder how much the performance difference is with a Standard tear..

Our first site using the

P0v3

tier is going live next monday, so I'll update on here once I get some performance feedback 😄 That client also decided to go with the 3 year reserved option, and they saved around 43%! (£208 vs £365 a month for the apps, 2x frontend 1x backoffice)

Hah! Nice!

Anyone using https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service/manage-scale-per-app? Something like 1 plan, scaled out to 2 servers, and then having the backoffice limited to one worker and the frontend allowed to scale per server.

Umbraco Cloud is pretty cheap 😄

Where's the fun in that 🤓 ... but you have a point 🙂

Got quite a few prod sites running on a single POv3 - busy period coming up and I need to load balance a few of these. They've been pretty solid on a POv3 though.

Thanks @SiempreSteve ... really good to know. I'm going to explore myself on a coming project.

Soryr - I mean a few prod sites running on POv3's - rather than a single webapp with multiple sites.

Is it bad that we have a P3V3 with probably close to 30 sites running on it 😅

No - I actually find the Azure stuff a little.... underpowered. It's nice to hear it can take some weight for that kind of coin

True, we can't be bothered with VM's, but we have weighed our options to split ASP's for our bigger customers and smaller customers

That's really good to know @ivodepivo ... not bad at all! I'm interested in that approach for smaller/low-traffic sites, especially if I can get the cost down with a 3 year reserved plan

Yeah we have been looking into the reserved plan as well. But we want to actually try different things and see if they make a difference. I think we have 5 umbraco sites which have more visitors monthly than the rest of the small sites combined. But performance has never seemed to degrade to a point where its bad or suffering

Gotta love those inherited projects 😁 This is all great stuff. Is it sad that I'm super excited by the snappily named

P0v3

Haha not at all. I was sold when I read premium

Hi all, our

P0v3

based site has been running really nicely since launch! Seems to be running just the same if not better than our

S2

sites! 😁 Both frontends are averaging about 55% RAM usage and 2% CPU usage (screenshot is frontend 1) (Pretty light traffic though, only 1-1.6k total requests per hour during weekday office hours) https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1159841200547844106/1217804799211475005/image.png?ex=66055c19&is=65f2e719&hm=41781cb6cf02951476eafea163429cd2287b6e816bc49cfab201c762de72cd91&

Ah nice... thanks for the update @Owain Jones !