• MrScottyTay
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    A proper corporate database with the security it needs and the amount of people accessing it (remember how many people bought Minecraft) yes it would be expensive to have multiple databases doing the same thing.

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      No it wouldn’t, millions of people bought it but the vast majority migrated, even if there were still millions of people to migrate this wouldn’t get hit very hard because people would not migrate all in one go, so any simple master+slave database system would work, even an SQLite is capable of handling this volume. The total cost of this would be less than $100 per year if they wanted to outsource everything (which is essentially nothing for Microsoft), if they used any of their existing servers for it the coat would be a lot less possibly very close to 0.

      • Kelly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Its Microsoft - they offer multiple DBaaS themselves.

        But it costs a lot more than $100 in man hours to properly propose, approve, and implement any production system.

        • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yes, but it also costs as much to sunset a system, so they spend that money regardless.

    • stardust@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      If people haven’t transferred would they be accessing it? Not much incentive for people who already transfered to go back to just claim a code, and people who haven’t yet probably aren’t going to be logging in all the time.