Azure Table Storage performance

3 minute read

Azure table storage is one of the cheapest No-SQL (Key value store) datastore amongst other services. Table storage can be used for multiple scenarios such as configuration store, diagnostics logs, WAD logs etc.

I had written some blogs earlier for writing and reading into table storage using the repository pattern.

We had a scenario where we were to import about 4 million records each month of data from a CSV file into table storage with a partition key as the id and at most 6-10 records per partition key. The question here was how would table storage fair when it has about a million partition keys.

So I decided to do an experiment to understand the write and read performance of a fully loaded table storage.


I had integrated application insights with the azure function which would give the duration taken by a dependency (HTTP requests, CosmoDb, TableStorage, Blob etc). I would recommend each application that runs on Azure should be integrated with application insights to understand the bottlenecks, performance statistics, create alerts etc. You can read more about application insights here.

Insert Function and Statistics

I wrote an azure function with a timer trigger of 30secs, with each execution it would insert a batch of 1-10 records for a partition key (Guid). Its a simple entity with no properties just the rowkey and partitionkey.

public class Entity : TableEntity
    public Entity()
    public Entity(string partitionKey)
        PartitionKey = partitionKey;
        RowKey = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();

This function ran for about a week and generated about half a million records.

I left this function to run for about a week, it currently has around 600K records with at least 100K unique partition keys. Using Appinsight analytics below is the timechart for average insertion time in 10 min window for the last 7 days.

Timechart for insertion

If you notice the graph above the insertions is mostly consistent around 50ms range except for few anamolies (This happens to all services within Azure, even Microsoft suggests to build in resliency as part of code). This proves that there is no performance issues to insert multiple partition keys into Azure Storage.

Appinsights query used

| where name endswith "batch" and (resultCode == 200 or resultCode == 202 or resultCode == 204) and success == 'True' 
| summarize count(), avg(duration) by bin(timestamp, 10m)  
| sort by timestamp asc 
| render timechart 

Querying Tablestorage for Partition Keys

Second part of this experiment was to measure performance of querying and reading the rows based on the partition key. So, I created another function which is again timer triggered for every 30secs. Each execution would randomly query the tablestorage for a partitionkey with a GUID.

This function was also left to run for about a day and the same window was chosen to check for the average dependency duration time chart. Below is the chart plotted for the same.

Timechart for reading

Except for the first “aberration” which took about 228ms to complete, rest of the queries executed well within 50ms latency. Which I feel is optimum considering the SLA.

Query used to chart above graph

| where name startswith "GET" and (resultCode == 200 or resultCode == 202 or resultCode == 204) and success == 'True' 
| summarize count(), avg(duration) by bin(timestamp, 10m)  
| sort by timestamp asc 
| render timechart 


This experiment proves that azure table storage is indeed scalable and can be used to store multiple partition key based data. Microsoft themselves use table storage for a lot of reasons one of them is collecting logs for Azure function. Imagine the amount of data that would be collected if you have a couple of function running every 5 secs for an year or more.

Points to consider

There are some things to consider while choosing TableStorage as your datastore.

  1. TableStorage has a primary index only on partition key and row key, hence you would have to select your PK and RK carefully. If you have more than these two fields for querying TableStorage isn’t really suited.
  2. There is no upper bound latency: Tablestorage is fast but Microsoft doesn’t provide any latency number, so it could vary as seen in the above timecharts.
  3. Global replication : TableStorage is part of the Storageaccount, you could have a RA_GRS model with an optional read-only region. But the consistency between the two is eventual and not clearly defined.

The code for the azure functions is available in the Github

Happy Coding!!!!

Leave a comment