Add TableStorage LINQ query support for Select, Count and Contains
Critical functions such as Select, Count and Contains are not currently available when querying TableStorage data.
If I only want a total number of rows that match a certain criteria I have no choice but to retrieve the data, count it and throw it away.
Adding support for Select would also help with heavy queries by only returning the data selected from a query.
Contains would be useful for searching. Using the Compare function is annoying.
Somehow I ended up back here while searching for using count with linq, and forgot that it wasn't supported. I also see nobody from Microsoft has replied since my last comment in August...great.
Please add sorting/orderby to this list as well. I didn't know table storage was so limited until I started trying to do something with it. :(
Alexsandro Pereira commented
Give me contains feature or give a mongodb engine :)
James Reategui commented
I would either discontinue the Table Storage because it gives the overall product a bad rep, OR make the improvements.
I know it would cannibalize some of the more expensive SQL Azure sales, if they added too many more LINQ features.
Jamison Morrow commented
Thanks to basic limitations like these, I'm having the worst time finding a use case for Azure tables that doesn't multiply my dev time, performance, and total lines of code by a factor of 5. I've given them a chance more than once. I've discovered I like the "idea" of Azure tables far more than the actual implementation. I've been forced to revert to SQL Azure each time out of necessity.
Still waiting for this feature guys! It's been over 2 years now. :) I'm specifically waiting for the ability to perform Counts.
Marc Kuperstein commented
I thought I heard that Count() was planned. Am I looking at the correct item?
Awesome idea ;)
Select was provided back in Sept 2011, so there has been some progress
Is this ever going to be implemented. It seems like the table storage development has stopped on Azure. It has been 2 years since this was suggested. Also same for Text search on table storage. Can we at least get a "NEVER GONNA HAPPEN" so we can quit holding out hope?
Oliver Weichhold commented
Almost looks like further development of Azure Tables is completely dead.
Need atleast orderby based on column for top operator. The current set are like iron age API's. Please understand the developor challenges.
Piotr Justyna commented
Please add "Contains" functionality to the Table Storage as this is critical for filtering data (and this is apparently the purpose of the Table Storage). I'm currently using Azure toolkit for iOS so I was kind of prepared that it will not be implemented out of the box as this is quite new product, but I was very surprised when I discovered that String.Contains() is not supported within my Worker Role project. Are you seriously not planning to implement it yet? It has been requested a year ago. I had (and still have) high hopes for Windows Azure, but you have to try harder to attract new developers to this interesting platform.
After 3 days fights with Azure no MORE!
day 1.Stupid support from India where someone instead answer to me on my simple questions start reading some help files.... Most incompetent support I never see in my live.
day 2. Reading documentation building application....
uploading data into storage tables very slow....
everything was perfect and working until I try to write a function count Row_Numers from table....
After 20 years developing with MS this is my worst day!
Why I should pay for some support from India when these people are useless?
Why I need to pay for some virtual hosting 4 times more expensive since I can get 120$ for dedicated server with 10TB bandwidth?
for 800$ unmetered 100Mb line?
Why I should work fulltime and back at home and continue to work for my private business and pay salaries to some TWITTERS from Microsoft who have no clue of this business!
Good luck to everyone
The fight ends here for me. I am very disapointed!
Simple aggregate functions are needed please, otherwise tables is just a big dictionary
Bayard Woodworth commented
Not having a server size Count is a big inconvenience. I probably would not have used the mechanism at all if I had known this limitation. I just went back to get some statistics and it is a lot harder/slower than it should be.
Ben Callister commented
Agreed. Basically, we need as much LINQ operator support as possible - the more the better. To expect devs to not need to be able to query ATS is not realistic. And SQL Azure is NOT the answer!!
Flyover Greg commented
Please add the COUNT function. Mainly need it for writing routines to check table integrity but pagination and other uses come to mind as well.
By adding the SELECT function, I assume we are talking about shaping data-returns (limiting what columns are returned)---I'm ALL FOR THAT as well--that would keep me from having to write intermediate services that basically shuck all the extra stuff I don't want to return to the client. I can see that MS makes more bandwidth money by this waste (when clients receive all columns), but that sounds more like 1960s-style Zero-Sum corporate reasoning than forward-thinking world-leadership type thinking.
Frederick Thompson commented
Extremely difficult to use ATS without more simple query functions