Amazon EKS Reviews

Our use cases for Amazon EKS include deploying and managing microservice-based applications, where Kubernetes excels at orchestrating microservices and Amazon EKS handles the heavy lifting of managing the control plane. We also use it for application modernization such as migrating legacy applications to containers and for hybrid and multi-cloud deployments, running Kubernetes workloads across on-premise and cloud environments. Additionally, we run secure and compliant workloads that require strict security and compliances, utilizing AWS IAM, VPC, and security services.

Furthermore, we leverage CI/CD pipelines to automate build, test, and deployment processes, and for machine learning, we implement SageMaker.

The most valuable features of Amazon EKS are the managed Kubernetes control plane, where AWS handles the provisioning, scaling, and maintenance, ensuring high availability and automatic patching. Integrations with AWS services offer seamless access such as IAM for access control, CloudWatch for monitoring, ELB and ALB for load balancing, and storage options including EBS, EFS, and S3. In terms of security and compliance, we utilize fine-grained access control through IAM role service accounts, support for private clusters, and network policies.

Amazon EKS supports both EC2 for full control over nodes and Fargate for serverless Kubernetes pods.

The positive impacts I have seen from using Amazon EKS include enhanced security and compliance with a managed control plane, automatic patching, updates, IAM integration for secure access to AWS services, private clusters, network policies, and encryption options. Additionally, I experience operational efficiency, scalability, performance, developer productivity, flexibility, portability, and observability and monitoring through CloudWatch, Prometheus, Grafana, and OpenTelemetry, which assists in troubleshooting issues and optimizing resources, ultimately leading to cost optimization.

Areas for improvement within Amazon EKS include the management of infrastructure. Prior to using Amazon EKS, we handled manual provisioning, patching, and scaling of our Kubernetes cluster, but now AWS manages control plane operations, automatic patching, and scaling, which has reduced our operational burden and resulted in fewer infrastructure-related incidents.

I believe only operational management could be improved in the next releases of Amazon EKS.

When it comes to stability and reliability in Amazon EKS, the reliability of the control plane managed by AWS is paramount, running across three availability zones in each region to ensure high availability and fault tolerance. AWS also automatically manages the scalability and health of crucial components such as the Kubernetes API server and etcd cluster. We have options for worker nodes, including auto mode, Fargate, managed node groups, and self-managed nodes, ensuring data plane reliability.

Regarding scalability in Amazon EKS, we see managed node groups and Fargate profiles, where we can automatically scale the number of EC2 instances in a node group using Cluster Autoscaler or Karpenter. For serverless pods, Amazon EKS can scale without managing EC2 nodes, and we can utilize horizontal pod auto-scaling based on CPU, memory, or custom metrics, along with support for cluster limits, multi-cluster, and multi-region load scalability.

Amazon EKS is highly scalable, showing improvement in areas such as infrastructure management, security, and cost efficiency, with features such as auto-scaling for pods and nodes, making it suitable for bursty and high-demand workloads.

Before using Amazon EKS, we relied on self-managed Kubernetes on EC2 as well as Docker Swarm for our workloads.

We decided to switch from Docker Swarm to Amazon EKS because it is a managed service that simplifies the handling of complex scalable and modern application workflows.

Setting up Amazon EKS for the first time involves prerequisites such as installing and configuring the Amazon CLI, then installing `kubectl`, and while `eksctl` is optional, I install it for easier setup. IAM permissions are also needed to create EKS resources.

My experience with the initial setup has been straightforward, and I did not face any challenges so far, especially with `eksctl`, although there are common challenges such as IAM role configuration, network complexity, and cluster access control.

We have managed to estimate savings of around 20 to 40% using Amazon EKS, specifically achieving savings on Fargate ranging from $30 to $45 per month based on our usage.

I consider Amazon EKS to be an affordable product overall.

Before choosing Amazon EKS, I did not evaluate other solutions as I found it to be the best one for us after checking the market.

The integration of Amazon EKS with IAM enhances our authentication process as IAM users or roles can be granted access to the Kubernetes API server, managed via the AWS Auth ConfigMap in the EKS cluster, allowing us to map IAM roles or users to Kubernetes RBAC roles.

When it comes to Amazon EKS integrating IAM into application development, we utilize IAM roles for service accounts that allow our application pods to securely access services such as S3 and DynamoDB without storing credentials. We first create a Kubernetes service account and associate it with IAM roles using annotations, enabling the pod to use this role to access AWS services via temporary credentials, providing a significant developer benefit by eliminating the need to manage secrets manually and ensuring access is secure and scoped per pod.

The benefits of Amazon EKS's automated patching feature for our Kubernetes clusters primarily include improved security through the automatic application of critical security patches to the control plane and worker nodes, which reduces exposure to known vulnerabilities such as CVEs and ensures compliance with security standards. A second benefit is the reduction of operational overhead, and thirdly, enhanced cluster stability, minimized downtime, and consistency across environments. With intelligent patch management, Amazon EKS often tests patches before release.

When it comes to managing complex workflows effectively on Amazon EKS, I find that it simplifies infrastructure management by abstracting away the complexity of managing Kubernetes control planes, allowing us not to worry about patching, scaling, or securing the master nodes. It also supports scalability for high-demand applications with auto-scaling features for both pods and nodes and provides enterprise-grade security.

I utilize the AWS EKS official documentation, accessible via docs.aws.amazon.com.

My impression of the documentation is that it is very easy to learn from scratch, making it accessible even for beginners, as it is comprehensive, well-structured, and production-ready. Especially for developers and DevOps engineers such as myself, we find the user guide, best practice guide, API reference, CI tools, and workshops to be highly reliable, developer-friendly, scalable, and flexible for deployment needs.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate Amazon EKS an 8.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

In my recent project, I have used Amazon EKS to deploy and scale machine learning and generative AI applications, containerizing LLM-powered APIs with Docker and deploying them using EKS for high availability and scalability. I also integrated the CI/CD pipelines and GitHub Actions to automate deployments into EKS clusters, leveraging IAM roles for service accounts, KMS encryption and VPC isolations for security. I used CloudWatch, Prometheus, and Grafana for monitoring, and Amazon EKS allowed me to build scalable, compliant, and enterprise-ready AI services without worrying about managing Kubernetes manually.

When it comes to the best features of Amazon EKS, there are some measurable properties such as variables we can feed into the model to help with market predictions. For example, for a credit risk scoring model, features might include transaction history, credit score, and income repayment. Selecting, cleaning, and transforming raw data into meaningful features to improve model performance will improve the precision and recall of the model significantly.

Amazon EKS has many powerful features that abstract the complexity of Kubernetes. Simple networking can be used for VPC and CNI, such as service meshes. However, EKS upgrades can lag sometimes when Kubernetes versions move quickly, delaying the adoption and adjustment for the latest features. I also see opportunities for better out-of-the-box monitoring, as integrating Grafana and Prometheus requires effort. Amazon EKS itself would make it easier to unify traces and metrics and allow for secure cross-cluster communications.

The initial setup in Amazon EKS is complex, especially compared to services such as ECS and Fargate, which I worked with in my US Bank project, involving VPC networking, IAM roles, or node groups. However, once set up, the deployment becomes easy. Using infrastructure as code, such as pipelines, I usually automate cluster creation with Terraform and integrate GitHub Actions. We use standardized Kubernetes manifests that make spinning up and scaling clusters much easier, so while the initial setup is complex, networking and IAM integrations make deployment and scaling smooth and easy to handle.

I have been using Amazon EKS for four years, and I have used it in my Accenture projects too, so I have good experience with Amazon EKS.

Regarding the support team from Amazon, I have some experience working with them, as most of the support cases I raised were related to cluster upgrades, networking issues, and IAM permission troubleshooting. In my project, we ran into deployment issues with EKS clusters and network failures across multiple nodes, and the support team helped us identify the VPC subnets.

Regarding the support team from Amazon, I have some experience working with them, as most of the support cases I raised were related to cluster upgrades, networking issues, and IAM permission troubleshooting. In my project, we ran into deployment issues with EKS clusters and network failures across multiple nodes, and the support team helped us identify the VPC subnets.

Positive

Before moving to Amazon EKS, I worked on different solutions such as Amazon ECS, which provides elastic containers that are more flexible for fine-grained scaling, making them a better choice. I have also deployed serverless APIs such as AWS Lambda and API Gateway for the LLM interface, where Lambda's runtime and cold starts differ. On the Azure side, I have used Azure Kubernetes Services.

The initial setup in Amazon EKS is complex, especially compared to services such as ECS and Fargate, which I worked with in my US Bank project, involving VPC networking, IAM roles, or node groups. However, once set up, the deployment becomes easy. Using infrastructure as code, such as pipelines, I usually automate cluster creation with Terraform and integrate GitHub Actions. We use standardized Kubernetes manifests that make spinning up and scaling clusters much easier, so while the initial setup is complex, networking and IAM integrations make deployment and scaling smooth and easy to handle.

The pricing of Amazon EKS varies; EKS pricing is somewhat affordable for small clusters but gets expensive at scale. If we manage it carefully, the control plane can be easier to handle. For bigger clusters, it will be somewhat expensive, but smaller clusters can be affordable depending on the choice.

I would recommend Amazon EKS to other people because it is useful, and I believe they will benefit from using it. Based on my extensive experience with the product in my recent project, I rate Amazon EKS 9 out of 10.

We use Amazon EKS for hosting our policy admin system, and it has its own benefits. The scalability aspect of it is what we considered Amazon EKS for. It is a managed service, so we don't need to take care of the underlying operating system and other things. It was one of the preferred services in AWS which we chose.

The benefits I have experienced with using the automated patching feature are key, because considering that this is a managed service, we want to be more focused on our application rather than doing all these upgrades, especially given the amount of upgrades at each of these microservices level applications. We don't want to worry about that, and there is always this blue and green setup which we can have where, if there are any issues, I should be able to switch over to my blue whenever there is a deployment. Those aspects have helped us.

What I appreciate best about Amazon EKS is the managed service part of it because we don't need to worry about the underlying operating systems or the upgrades we need to have. The flexibility at which we can spin up multiple pods in each of the Kubernetes service and the service availability aspect of it are the key points.

I have used the integration with IAM; we used IAM roles, focusing on security aspects. We had multiple IAM roles and policies defined so that it is quite secure.

A few improvements I can think of for Amazon EKS would be on the monitoring side; they have very good monitoring aspects of it, but it has its pros and cons. Having some access and visibility into their Amazon EKS services and setup would be good because there are instances where some of the pods crash, but we don't have detailed monitoring available since once the pod crashes, we can't get enough logs. If they can have a backdoor or backup capability, whenever a pod is not able to serve, to get all the metrics before killing it, that would help us investigate the reasoning behind it more thoroughly. I think that side of it is missing.

Regarding Amazon EKS pricing, they have corporate level discounts, but one key aspect is the pros and cons. One immediate deploy capability is that I can trigger a pipeline to get an Amazon EKS setup done and start using it, which is much more efficient in the short term. However, in the long run, the scenarios we've seen indicate that it requires integration with other services, and the network egress charges are a bit higher. The intent of starting with reduced costs using Amazon EKS doesn't hold as clearly when we consider it for the long run; we start with a low cost and then realize it doesn't justify that.

I have been using Amazon EKS for almost five years.

The support for AWS tools, such as integration, has significantly influenced our management. Considering that we are a big corporate with direct connects with the AWS solution architect and other people we work with, it's as simple as raising that support request and they will be here. I think we even had the highest level of support we can get from AWS with respect to this.

I think very highly of Amazon's support team; they are really good, especially considering that we have the highest level of support and their support management team is also involved in calls to give any kind of priority to our requests.

Positive

I would recommend Amazon EKS to other people, but it depends on the scenario. Kubernetes for sure, but I suggest going for Amazon EKS if yours is a smaller enterprise. If your load is too high and fluctuating, then it makes sense to try Amazon EKS, learn how Kubernetes works for your organization, and evaluate the cost-benefit analysis. If you are considering it for a longer run, I recommend conducting a cost analysis to see if moving to a local on-prem system could be more beneficial. It truly depends on the case scenario, so it's important to do the cost analysis as well. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Amazon EKS an eight.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

For our microservice architecture, where we have multiple services for our business use cases, we have been using Amazon EKS from the very beginning.

The integration with IAM enhances the authentication processes as it prevents multiple outages, failures, and mis-deletions from users.

The Amazon EKS support for AWS tools integration is very effective because it's within the ecosystem of AWS itself, integrating almost with everything. Amazon EKS itself uses EC2 instances, which are the basic services that Amazon provides, on top of which we have VPCs, security groups, and all.

The self-healing feature on Amazon EKS identifies when one of the nodes goes down and spawns a new node, degrading the older node, which helps to minimize our administrative burdens by reducing one stage of complexity on our SRE team.

The dashboard of Amazon EKS is very effective, where I can see all the nodes, the pods that are present, and it also shows the current CPU utilization, memory utilization, along with the pods that are scheduled on the nodes. Those insights in one place are very valuable.

We have utilized Amazon EKS's integration with the IAM solution.

We are utilizing the self-healing nodes in Amazon EKS.

I have one suggestion for Amazon EKS. When working on microservice architecture, we need to use that context and have K9s installed for a graphical user interface to check pods and nodes in a clear-cut manner. If that support is added within Amazon EKS itself to check all the config maps and everything within the UI itself, that would be very beneficial.

I have been working with Amazon EKS for one and a half years.

The initial setup of Amazon EKS was completed by other teams, and they performed it straightforwardly as they had some orchestration script which sets up the EKS cluster and has multiple add-ons to be added.

Starting to work with the Amazon EKS product was straightforward for me since I had previously taken a course on Kubernetes.

The main benefits I have seen from using Amazon EKS are the reduced complexity overall, where Amazon manages everything effectively, and the other benefit is the microservice architecture. Amazon is flawless in most cases, though we encountered a few unknowns from the EKS cluster itself. Apart from that, it is always up, and we have the support team for Amazon EKS as well. Our SREs had interactions with EKS, and within minutes or within 10 or 20 minutes, we would get the EKS cluster up if there was an issue.

There is one person from AWS who acts as a bridge between our team and their team, so we can ask them if we have an issue.

Positive

Before Amazon EKS, I was in college and did not use any other Kubernetes solutions or container management products.

The initial setup of Amazon EKS was completed by other teams, and they performed it straightforwardly as they had some orchestration script which sets up the EKS cluster and has multiple add-ons to be added.

The initial setup of Amazon EKS was completed by other teams.

The pricing of Amazon EKS is subjective because it depends on the use case and the instances that we are using. Amazon provides everything, every instance, and it also gives a cost at the fore-end, so it depends upon our use case whether we want them to be higher cost or lower cost.

We have not evaluated any other options. From the very start, we were using AWS only, and it has been good and is working fine, so we never evaluated other options.

I am not aware of the automated patching feature in Amazon EKS.

I work with Amazon EKS and am still currently working with it.

We use Kubecost for managing Amazon EKS, which is an external tool we use to find all the healthy status, memory utilization, cost, and all for our EKS cluster.

My advice for organizations considering Amazon EKS for their environment is to proceed with it, especially if they are trying for a microservice architecture. It's already very good, with no flaws. Just one thing is to have a look at the cost of the instances they are trying to provision.

I rate Amazon EKS 10 out of 10.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

I am actually the end user myself without a third party at my company.

I am using Amazon EKS for my Kubernetes with a private ECR on AWS. The application focuses on workforce software as a service.

Amazon EKS adapts and fits with my needs. It provides correct tools since I still need to configure manually some nodes or setting an SSH into the nodes.

I love the automatic automation of Amazon EKS as it manages my Kubernetes. It has a log dashboard for my Kubernetes, and I can manage it easily. Sometimes I need to manually manage using Amazon EKS rather than ECS for fully managed service from AWS. There is more override capability for myself, so I can manually create another group for nodes when needed.

Amazon EKS is integrated with IAM. If I want to allow my coworker to access Amazon EKS, I can allow some permissions with least privileges. For example, if my colleague wants to look at application logs, I can grant permission only to see the logs without editing or deleting the pods.

Amazon EKS helps significantly with the development process because I can rest without worries about outages. If an outage occurs, Amazon EKS automatically replaces nodes. It helps with automation in the development lifecycle.

I am using self-healing nodes on Amazon EKS when deploying new nodes. If nodes become unhealthy, Amazon EKS replaces them with new ones, which helps with my role as a DevOps Engineer.

The benefit of Amazon EKS's automated patching feature saves my time. I can leave it to automatically handle any node issues, which greatly benefits my job efficiency.

From my perspective, Amazon EKS is quite sufficient. The main issue is that Amazon EKS only has an update for Amazon Linux 2023. The challenge occurs when switching to a new operating system. Currently, I am using Amazon Linux 2, but according to AWS information, it will be deprecated. I hope AWS continues to support the operating system for Amazon Linux 2.

I started using Amazon EKS since late 2022.

For stability management, I can allow developers to access Amazon EKS with specific permissions using least privileges. This allows them to perform necessary tasks such as viewing logs without having the ability to edit or delete pods.

Amazon EKS helps significantly with the development process by handling outages automatically. When an outage occurs, it automatically replaces nodes, allowing for continuous development and automated lifecycle management.

I don't frequently communicate with the technical support and customer service of Amazon EKS. They are quite helpful since when I need to verify infrastructure issues from their side, I receive good information. I would rate them seven out of ten because sometimes communication can be challenging due to difference accents

Neutral

Before Amazon EKS, I only used plain containers using Docker on a plain EC2, without services orchestration from AWS.

Initially, I deployed Amazon EKS manually without infrastructure as code. The challenges were related to permissions, but I understood them adequately. It can be accomplished more easily using infrastructure as code tools.

The implementation was done internally.

This solution is very important since my applications must run continuously because many users need the application with minimal downtime.

The price of Amazon EKS is not a major issue since my company accepts it. The price remains good from the company's perspective.

I chose Amazon EKS because AWS provides robust and more complete services than other service providers. I selected Amazon EKS because I wanted to manually override settings. I prefer it over fully managed services like ECS or Fargate. For cost optimization, Amazon EKS fits my needs perfectly.

I am using RDS, EC2, S3, Route 53, and a load balancer alongside Amazon EKS. The overall rating I would give Amazon EKS is 8 out of 10.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We are migrating our services into container services. We build websites and all of our products' backends are based on Amazon EKS.

The simplicity and management portal make it a neat solution. You don't have to fiddle around with too many open source tools, as it's just a comprehensive solution.

We use the pipeline, which is critical for us to deploy automatically. This eliminates manual intervention, which is really helpful.

We initially had some issues getting the logging out of it, because what they're providing into CloudTrail is what we get. If we wanted to go in-depth, we had to deploy third-party tools. We did try the sidecar way of getting the logs. Ideally, if the platform was able to provide those kinds of valuable logs, that would be beneficial. Adding enhanced logging capabilities would be a nice improvement.

We have been using the solution for three plus years.

Time to value is good with fast deployment and very good documentation that is really helpful.

I don't personally deal with the costing part, but I think it's a fair amount. That's the only reason we're using it continuously, as otherwise we would have moved somewhere else.

The implementation was done in-house.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 9.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

The main use cases for Amazon EKS are that we use it normally in some new projects to optimize our costs. Instead of having many ECS services running, we prefer to set up a Kubernetes cluster and set everything there. For me, it is primarily for optimizing our resources.

What I find valuable about Amazon EKS is that it helps us manage all the Kubernetes. It isn't the workload, it is the main part of the Kubernetes, the head of all the cluster. Automatic updates are available, and we can set everything we created in AWS in Kubernetes, including IAM configuration. We can create policies such as creating a private endpoint for S3. The integration of Kubernetes with the AWS ecosystem is the best feature that Amazon EKS provides.

The IAM integration in Amazon EKS helps enhance the authentication processes because we can do this in a more granular way. Using IAM, you can set exactly what the service needs. If a service or application needs to upload objects or data to S3, connect to RDS, or perform other tasks, using IAM is the easiest way. The benefit is that it works in a granular way and it's easy to set up and validate. When you examine the permissions and rules to ensure everything has the correct permission at the correct moment, using IAM is perfect because you can validate and set up everything effectively.

Amazon EKS's support for different AWS tools integrations has accelerated our application development because we can think about all aspects comprehensively. We can architect using AWS services and objects, and Amazon EKS accepts this seamlessly. We don't need to translate the idea for AWS. We can write this idea using AWS objects and services, and Amazon EKS corresponds to that. It accelerates projects and is easy to manage because we can use Terraform to implement it.

I am using the self-healing nodes in the Amazon EKS solution. We have a client with a production workload running on spot instances. When a spot or node crashes, Amazon EKS starts a new node and moves everything before the node stopped. This self-healing is excellent because we don't experience disruptions. We don't face situations where a node stops and we need five minutes to start a new one. We use it in specific environments and can observe the difference when enabling or disabling Amazon EKS self-healing.

We are utilizing the automated patching in Amazon EKS. The valuable benefits I have experienced using the automated patching feature for the Kubernetes clusters directly increase security. Kubernetes typically releases patches focused on security rather than new features. It's beneficial because we can focus on our work without constantly thinking about new patch releases or upgrade deployments. Amazon EKS handles this automatically for us.

We face some issues with Amazon EKS when using the node group to control which nodes can start. We have a limitation where we need to set just one kind of instance - only large instances, only small instances, or only extra-large instances. This is a problem. It would be beneficial if we could specify that certain containers or services start on small instances rather than large ones.

I am uncertain whether Amazon EKS supports all LTS versions, and I think this would be something beneficial. Additionally, AWS has great AI features, so when we need to make updates to Amazon EKS, it would be helpful if AI could assist with planning, identifying migration requirements, and considering costs.

I have been working with Amazon EKS for about two years in production. Including study time and other experiences, I have been involved with it for approximately four years.

I faced challenges in the initial stages with Amazon EKS. The main challenge is that when we set up the cluster, it appears as a huge infrastructure just for a small application. When you set up Amazon EKS, it is configured at a large scale by default. You can't start small and gradually expand. This makes sense because for smaller applications, ECS works effectively. If you want a more integrated ecosystem, you can use Amazon EKS. The challenge lies in migrating everything, as you can't start using Amazon EKS on a small scale. It typically requires a big cluster with one, two, or three nodes. We also faced challenges with developers needing to adapt their mindset to the new way of doing things.

I have escalated questions to the technical support of Amazon EKS two or three times, and they always provided good solutions. When we don't understand the questions, we schedule a call to demonstrate the issue, and we always receive the correct answer.

I reached out for technical support with Amazon EKS because we faced issues starting a service. The way we declared the services was incorrect, but we weren't aware of this. We called AWS support for assistance. Another issue involved a security problem that we identified and reported to AWS.

I would rate the technical support of Amazon EKS a 10. The documentation is good, and when human interaction is needed, it's readily available.

Positive

From my perspective, I don't see any disadvantages of Amazon EKS compared to competitors in the market. Amazon EKS represents the state of the art. While Google has a powerful engine that offers more granular control, the additional configuration can be overwhelming. Amazon EKS balances the power of custom configuration with ease of setup.

I find the pricing of Amazon EKS complicated because I live in Brazil, where we use reals. With the exchange rate and taxes, the price appears six times higher. However, when viewed in dollars, it offers great features at reasonable pricing. Lower prices are always beneficial, and a reduction in hourly cost or promotional discounts would be appreciated, but the current price-to-benefit ratio is worthwhile.

My advice to other organizations considering Amazon EKS for their environment is to plan carefully. I strongly recommend planning and reading the documentation because Amazon EKS is resourceful and typically offers multiple ways to accomplish the same task. Careful planning, reviewing case studies for comparison, and thoughtful migration to Amazon EKS are worthwhile investments. Overall, I rate Amazon EKS a 9 out of 10.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

I have a total of around four years of experience in multiple clouds, especially in AWS, and many times I used Amazon EKS for our multiple products and projects.

In our environment, we already have all the other infrastructure and services running on AWS, so we benefit from using Amazon EKS because the other services can easily communicate with it. For example, some of our services need to access S3, and our application objects reside there, so we can easily integrate them with Amazon EKS. We also use IAM rules for integration to provide granular access to resources. As per your question, in our environment, most of our clients and resources reside in AWS, which is why we prefer to deploy other services there, as most of our development environment uses Lightsail. This gives us an edge, allowing us to easily move from development to staging or production environments within the same cloud.

When we compare other clouds, AWS has an edge among all the crowded options right now. My observations and reviews with AWS also affirm this because it provides a user-friendly experience and offers many options that other clouds do not provide. When my team and I work with AWS, we always feel comfortable. I do not know the exact reason behind it; maybe we have a lot of previous experience, and we are familiar with AWS. That is why other reviews from my colleagues at previous companies indicate that AWS has some edge compared to other clouds.

I would recommend Amazon EKS to other organizations because it provides simple configuration, easy management, safety, granular access, and vast monitoring capabilities where we can easily monitor our clusters using CloudWatch. However, I would think about a clearer dashboard for Amazon EKS, but overall, I think it is sufficient.

When we need to deploy the application, we require a large number of instances. Therefore, I hope and believe I will not face out-of-capacity issues in AWS, especially since I have not yet experienced traffic around 50,000 plus, and I believe I will not face such issues in Amazon EKS the next time we deploy with a large number of nodes and worker nodes.

Additionally, the upgradation process of Kubernetes rapidly rolls out new releases, so it should be easier for our production environment to upgrade Amazon EKS clusters. Sometimes when we are going to upgrade the Amazon EKS cluster, we need to check the backups, and we should have options to export our configurations, such as exporting the configuration to S3 or somewhere else to find backups. Other tools, such as Velero, provide this functionality to back up configurations, so I hope this backup process will help us fulfill our backup policies and other requirements.

For the pricing aspect of Amazon EKS, one specific issue arises when we deploy applications, especially as we provide SaaS services to our clients. We would like to know the cost for each customer, but we face issues because AWS charges $70 USD for the Amazon EKS engine. We struggle to divide the worker nodes' fees and the engine cost among clients, as some users have low traffic and visibility while others have large amounts of visibility and traffic. Thus, we face cost-related issues when running multiple customers on the same Amazon EKS cluster.

I have been using the solution for approximately four years.

The initial setup and deployment of Amazon EKS was straightforward; I easily provisioned the correct cluster. Sometimes, due to the depreciation of the AMIs, AWS provides warnings to use the latest version of the EKS AMIs because some of our scripts or Terraform scripts are old. I think it is good practice for AWS to provide messages to the console to upgrade your cluster, but overall, my experience with provisioning the Amazon EKS cluster is good, and I highly appreciate it.

I have not faced any issues that require escalation to customer support, and until today, I do not feel any need to escalate anything to the support team. I am happy with the service.

To meet our requirements, our services need a large amount of CPU and memory, so we need high-spec machines. When we deploy applications, we require a large number of instances.

I have not faced any issues that require escalation to customer support, and until today, I do not feel any need to escalate anything to the support team. I am happy with the service.

Positive

I also work with other clouds, such as Oracle Cloud, but I feel comfortable with AWS because I faced some issues, such as out of capacity when we designed the infrastructure for our large traffic.

The initial setup and deployment of Amazon EKS was straightforward; I easily provisioned the correct cluster. Sometimes, due to the depreciation of the AMIs, AWS provides warnings to use the latest version of the EKS AMIs because some of our scripts or Terraform scripts are old. I think it is good practice for AWS to provide messages to the console to upgrade your cluster, but overall, my experience with provisioning the Amazon EKS cluster is good, and I highly appreciate it.

I used Amazon EKS through its console rather than through the AWS Marketplace.

I have not checked the pricing yet, but I will look into it to see if EKS brings ROI or a return on investment for us.

Regarding self-healing nodes in Amazon EKS, I have not worked on that self-healing feature.

For automated patching in Amazon EKS, I have not used that feature.

Regarding disadvantages of Amazon EKS compared to competitors in the market, I think every cloud provider has the same Kubernetes engine and worker nodes. However, I believe AWS provides a more user-friendly environment, which is why many of our customers are trying to deploy their infrastructure or applications on AWS. I do not think there is any specific reason not to prefer Amazon EKS.

I have not integrated IAM tools with Amazon EKS yet, but my other teams have. I think they used Okta, but I'm not certain about it. I have some demos from a long time ago, but I think Okta is for SSO.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Amazon EKS a nine out of ten.

Private Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)