New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Azure Table Storage Provider #1142

Closed
rowanmiller opened this Issue Nov 26, 2014 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
9 participants
@rowanmiller
Member

rowanmiller commented Nov 26, 2014

Parent item to track finishing this provider once we have the core of EF7 padded out and stabilized.

@rowanmiller rowanmiller added this to the Backlog milestone Nov 26, 2014

@wangkanai

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wangkanai

wangkanai Oct 24, 2015

As the Core coming to RC. How would Azure Table Storage provider start to kick in development?

wangkanai commented Oct 24, 2015

As the Core coming to RC. How would Azure Table Storage provider start to kick in development?

@Aanhane

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Aanhane

Aanhane Sep 2, 2016

Any update on this? I'm really looking forward to implement Table Storage with EF Core!

Aanhane commented Sep 2, 2016

Any update on this? I'm really looking forward to implement Table Storage with EF Core!

@venkatesh-bhupathi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@venkatesh-bhupathi

venkatesh-bhupathi Oct 14, 2016

Any update on this? Any timelines for making this available as released component?

venkatesh-bhupathi commented Oct 14, 2016

Any update on this? Any timelines for making this available as released component?

@rowanmiller

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rowanmiller

rowanmiller Oct 14, 2016

Member

@venkatesh-bhupathi The provider is currently on-hold as our team focuses on adding in the critical features that prevent folks from adopting EF Core. We do plan to bring the provider back and RTM it, but we don’t have a timeframe at this stage.

Member

rowanmiller commented Oct 14, 2016

@venkatesh-bhupathi The provider is currently on-hold as our team focuses on adding in the critical features that prevent folks from adopting EF Core. We do plan to bring the provider back and RTM it, but we don’t have a timeframe at this stage.

@divega

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@divega

divega May 8, 2017

Member

Consider issues #1187, #961 and #458.

Member

divega commented May 8, 2017

Consider issues #1187, #961 and #458.

@guardrex

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@guardrex

guardrex Sep 9, 2017

Does the addition of the propose-close label mean that you've decided to never support ATS in EF Core?

guardrex commented Sep 9, 2017

Does the addition of the propose-close label mean that you've decided to never support ATS in EF Core?

@ajcvickers

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ajcvickers

ajcvickers Sep 9, 2017

Member

@guardrex The "propose-close" label is something that can be added by members of the EF team to suggest we should revisit this item to see whether or we should continue to keep this issue on the backlog. It doesn't mean we have decided to close it yet.

In this case, we may close the issue because things have moved forward in the last couple of years to a place where a Cosmos DB provider may have much more value than an ATS provider, and if the trend continues it may be that ATS is never high enough priority for our team to implement. That doesn't prevent a community driven effort to create a provider, such as is the case for many other database back-ends.

Member

ajcvickers commented Sep 9, 2017

@guardrex The "propose-close" label is something that can be added by members of the EF team to suggest we should revisit this item to see whether or we should continue to keep this issue on the backlog. It doesn't mean we have decided to close it yet.

In this case, we may close the issue because things have moved forward in the last couple of years to a place where a Cosmos DB provider may have much more value than an ATS provider, and if the trend continues it may be that ATS is never high enough priority for our team to implement. That doesn't prevent a community driven effort to create a provider, such as is the case for many other database back-ends.

@ajcvickers

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ajcvickers

ajcvickers Feb 17, 2018

Member

Closing this as we are focusing our efforts on Cosmos DB (initially as a document store) rather than ATS. We don't intend for the EF team to implement and maintain an ATS provider, but we would be fully supportive of community efforts to do so.

Member

ajcvickers commented Feb 17, 2018

Closing this as we are focusing our efforts on Cosmos DB (initially as a document store) rather than ATS. We don't intend for the EF team to implement and maintain an ATS provider, but we would be fully supportive of community efforts to do so.

@ajcvickers ajcvickers closed this Feb 17, 2018

@ajcvickers ajcvickers removed this from the Backlog milestone Feb 17, 2018

@MisinformedDNA

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MisinformedDNA

MisinformedDNA commented Jul 17, 2018

Adding link for reference: Writing a Database Provider

@MisinformedDNA

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MisinformedDNA

MisinformedDNA Jul 20, 2018

@ajcvickers Since ATS and Cosmos Tables share the same API, I presume this means you aren't creating an EF provider for Cosmos Tables either. Is that right?

MisinformedDNA commented Jul 20, 2018

@ajcvickers Since ATS and Cosmos Tables share the same API, I presume this means you aren't creating an EF provider for Cosmos Tables either. Is that right?

@ajcvickers

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@ajcvickers

ajcvickers Jul 25, 2018

Member

@MisinformedDNA It's not currently in our plans.

Member

ajcvickers commented Jul 25, 2018

@MisinformedDNA It's not currently in our plans.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment