Skip to main content

How does consistency levels affects the latency of Azure CosmosDB

Azure Cosmos DB has 5 different consistency levels (Strong / Bounded Stateless / Session / Consistent Prefix / Eventual). Each consistency level can affect the latency of operations that we are doing on the storage.
In this post we will try to respond to the following question:

  • What is the latency impact of different consistency level? 

Latency in general
The current SLAs are offering us the guarantee that the READ and WRITE operation is in 99% of the cases under 10ms. The average latency of the current content fetch from Azure Cosmos DB is under 4ms in 50% of the cases.
The write operations are a little slower, reaching maximum 5ms in 50% of the cases. This is applicable only for Bounded Stateless / Session / Consistent Prefix and Eventual.

For Strong consistency and databases across multiple regions, the latency is higher, but this is expected because of the replication requirements. For example if you have Strong consistency on a database that is replicated in two different regions the latency would be equal to 2 roundtrips time between of the hardest regions plus the 10ms latency in 99% of the cases. The extra 10ms comes from the read operation (confirmation) required to ensure that the read operation was done with success.
There is also a thing that you need to take into account:

  • There is NO SLA for the latency between two different Azure Regions.
This means that it is impossible to calculate and have an SLA for Strong consistency. The total latency will be in most of the cases:
  • Strong consistency for 2 regions = 10ms + 2 * roundtrips between the regions calls
, in 99% of the cases.

NOTE: Replication monitoring  - Microsoft Azure is monitoring the replication latency. The information is available from the Azure Portal (Azure Portal / Metrics/ Consistency Level).

The REAL TEST
Take into account that each time when you will run the same or a different test, the result will be different. There are multiple things that can affect the result, including the machine that it is used to do the test.

I run all the test from a Standard_D5_v2 VM, with 16vCores and 56 of memory. Each test ran for 500.000 times and used concept and methodology from Practical Large-Scale Latency Estimation that I used also in the past for other types of measurements. There was a warm-up time and from the 4% from min and max latency were excluded. The initial collection size was around 100.000 documents with an average size of the document around 50KB.
Please take into account that this are the result that I getter for my sandbox. Does not represents the reality for other cases or for general cases.
The obtained results are extremely good and provided high confidence in the reliability of Azure Cosmos DB.

What about RPO and RTO?
Let's take the first one Recovery Point Objective (RPO). The current SLA is interesting, offering a maximum value of 240 minutes for any type of consistency level or no. of replicas. 
The current RPOs are:
  • Strong / Single Master = 0 mins
  • Session / Multi-master < 15 mins
  • Consistent Prefix / Multi-master < 15 mins
  • Eventual / Multi-master < 15 mins
  • Maximum < 240 mins

The Recovery Time Objective (RTO) is similar, offering us an SLA of maximum of 7 days, with:
  • Session / Multi-master = 0 mins
  • Consistent Prefix / Multi-master = 0 mins
  • Eventual / Multi-master = 0 mins
  • Strong / Single master < 15 mins
  • Session / Single master < 15 mins
Conclusion
The performances level of the system can be impacted directly by what level of consistency level we decide to use. Each consistency level had a direct impact on performance, data consistency and costs. In most of the cases, the Session consistency level is a perfect tradeoff between eventual consistency across all active users and performance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...