Skip to main content

VM Creation: Custom Scrips vs Custom Images

When we need custom applications or configuration to be done on the VM we can do this on Azure in two ways:
  • Custom ISO
  • Custom scripts extensions (known also as Formula in DevLabs context)
 I noticed that a recurrent questions appears in discussions with different people:
When I should use custom ISO vs custom scripts extensions?

Before jumping to a discussion where we would compare this two options and what are the advantages/disadvantages of each option, let's see what are the steps involved to create a script of an ISO.

Custom ISO 
We can create a custom ISO on our local machine, with all our applications installed on it. Once we have the ISO created we just need to take our VHD and prepared it for Azure. More about this steps can be found on Microsoft documentation (Capture a managed image of a generalized VM in Azure and Create custom VM images).

Custom scripts extensions
Custom scripts are executed after the VHD is deployed on the VM. Using this scripts we can push or install any kind of application or change OS configuration. I would compare custom scripts with post-deployment scripts, that are executed after the VM deployment finish.

Custom ISO vs Custom scripts extensions
Don't expect to have a winner from this fight. Each option has advantages and disadvantageous. The context of your project will define what option best suites your needs.
In the below table I tried to catch the most important things that you need to consider before selecting the provisioning mechanism that you want to use.
Custom Image Custom scripts
Pros: Fast deployment Pros: Environment/App updates can be pushed on the fly (artifacts)
Pros: No extra steps after deployment Pros: Last version of VM image, including updates is used
Pros: VMs from same image are identical Pros: Default settings can be specified like VM Size, VNET configuration
Cons: Image needs to be recreated when something change Pros: Default settings are used as default values, but during provisioning other values can be specified
Cons: No dynamic update of the image Cons: Deployment using formulas can take longer time (provisioning+running formula/scripts)
Cons: Windows and other Updates are pushed only after provisioning

What should I use? 
I would say that in most of the cases, custom scrips should be a good option. They are flexible enough to allow you to change or update the artifacts without having to recreate the ISO, offering you a deployment that already contains last updated of OS also. No time wasted for OS updates.
There are some narrow cases when you want to use custom images. The case that I see the most common one is when you want a fast provisioning of the VM. For example when you want to increase the number of VMs in a cluster, where scalability is extremely important.

The winner is...
As you already notice, custom scrips are my favorites and I see them a better solution in most of the cases.


Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

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 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 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…