Amazon EKS Reviews

I have clients that run on Kubernetes engines. 

The tool works well with the nodes in AWS. It's scalability is also good in terms of architecture. 

I am not impressed with the tool's Amazon console. It also needs to add security features. 

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I would rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's premium support is good. 

Positive

The solution's deployment gets completed in minutes. You need one DevOps engineer to maintain the solution. 

The solution is pricey. The tool's pricing is monthly. 

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. It is the best platform for Kubernetes. The tool is also compliant. You need a demo to get started with it. 

We run all our microservices across the globe with Amazon EKS. We also use it for development, testing, and maintenance.

In the past, we have faced challenges with scalability and maintenance while running clusters. Amazon EKS is very easy to maintain. So it allows us to focus on our deployment.

The most important aspect of Amazon EKS is that it is easy to set up and very easy to upgrade. So we can focus on maintaining and deploying our microservice. It is also easy to scale and easy to monitor.

Amazon EKS provides very minimum information during the upgrade of the node group. When the upgrade doesn't work well, it doesn't give enough information for us to troubleshoot. So it would be great if Amazon EKS provided more information in such cases. 

Amazon EKS should enable some AIOps.

I have been using Amazon EKS for the past three years.

As a Kubernetes-managed platform, it is pretty stable. You can stabilize the new version when it is available in AWS.

It is easy to set up, and the Amazon EKS control plane accommodates scaling.

Whenever we experience any challenges, we always get a very fast response from AWS support. We are happy with the support provided so far.

We shifted to Amazon EKS because we faced some issues with our old system on OpenShift. OpenShift also has a high license price as compared to Amazon EKS.

We had some challenges at the beginning. It took us a few weeks to get one cluster up. Later, we improved our approach by using Terraform to manage it. Now, we can set up many clusters within one or two hours. We use around 60 clusters now.

We implemented it through our in-house team.

Amazon EKS is very cost-effective. I rate the pricing a ten on a scale of one to ten.

Other teams in the organization are trying to explore Google Kubernetes Engine. However, for our team, AWS is a lot easier. Our team might not move to other cloud providers because running Terraform is very useful for us.

In the internal cluster, we have four hundred people working with Amazon EKS. We have a lot of customers running billions of transactions. Overall, I rate Amazon EKS a nine out of ten.

I use Amazon EKS for telco event monitoring.

My company found Amazon EKS beneficial in terms of the scalability and stability of event monitoring.

What I found most valuable in Amazon EKS is its maturity as a cloud computing technology.

An area for improvement in Amazon EKS is the user experience. The platform could be more user-friendly. Only an expert can manage and use it.

I've been using Amazon EKS for four years.

The stability of Amazon EKS is a ten for me.

Scalability-wise, Amazon EKS is a ten. My team didn't have any problems scaling it.

I had some issues with Amazon EKS. The technical support team found the problems difficult to solve at the time, so support-wise, it's a nine out of ten. Support is not perfect.

Positive

I didn't do the initial setup for Amazon EKS, so I have no idea how easy or difficult it is.

I saw ROI from Amazon EKS.

Amazon EKS has fair pricing. It's better in terms of pricing than other platforms.

I advise anyone planning to use Amazon EKS to do the training because it's initially tough to use the platform.

I rate Amazon EKS as nine out of ten.

Our client in the healthcare industry has multiple clinics and patients who use the solution to interact with their portal and insert patient details. Patient information is managed via databases created in the solution. 

We are still exploring how the solution benefits us because we are enhancing many things on the application side including bug fixes or other items at the code level. 

On the cluster side, we are exploring options to enhance application performance. We are not sure if the solution has created a drastic change, but before we were able to perform and now we are performing well. 

The solution's Autoscaler option allows for an increase in worker notes whenever particular thresholds are exceeded. In our client's case, this is beneficial because the application sits idle the whole night and peaks in the morning hours of 9-10 am as everyone starts interacting with it and processing their workload. 

The solution is quite intelligent and is enhanced every day. They recently introduced a carpenter service that provides added advantages and are working on auto-scaling enhancements which have already allowed us to scale up our Kubernetes Clusters. 

The solution should include a popup for clusters so that all relevant information is visible at the bottom of a page. 

When clusters exist or are running, there isn't much detail on the first phase so navigating and clicking on different options is required to search for relevant information. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

I really like the stability of the solution. 

We are using the solution to its full capacity to manage various environments and clusters that segregate our client's workload.

The solution is scalable and includes the ability to instruct a cluster to automatically upscale or downscale depending on thresholds written in the code. 

Support is quite good. I haven't used technical support for this solution but have raised tickets for other Amazon products such as IAM or S3 and received help with documentation and tutorials. 

I started my journey as a DevOps engineer with this solution per our client's requirement. 

I was not involved in the initial setup because all customers already had the solution in place before I started interacting with them. I know that setup requires streamlining but is quite easy and just takes time. 

I use some pipelines to deploy workloads such as Terraform or Argo CD where I build artifacts or codes that interact with the solution. Whenever a merge occurs, the pipelines get triggered and automatically deploy in the development environment. If test pieces pass, then they move to the next phase and are deployed on the production level. 

A team of five would be a good fit for a mid-level customer because they can simultaneously work on writing home scripts for the EKS Cluster, building the whole network, and reviewing existing queries. A larger company might require more developers. 

The solution is quite costly and developers will start exploring other solutions or moving their workloads to other clouds if costs aren't reduced.

Our client pays the licensing fees so I don't have specifics about its cost, but I hear that the solution is expensive so I am rating it a five out of ten. 

We are analyzing the solution's behavior but might switch to ECS which provides dedicated resources to an application and runs on its own. 

If you are interested in implementing the solution, first refer to the documentation or existing use cases. 

For example, a streaming company similar to Netflix can adopt and modify a use case related to the Amazon portal. There are resources that help with deciding to implement the solution. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use this solution for containerization and push containers into the EKS or CI/CD pipeline in the DevOps pipeline. It's very easy and well-managed for autoscale as we can manage our node groups. In addition, we can tailor autoscaling to our needs.

Amazon EKS with AWS is very good because we can connect our AWS Kubernetes Services with our CI/CD pipelines. We can integrate our EKS with our CloudWatch and Grafana, and other monitoring services are also available. We can also monitor as per our requirements.

The best solution is in AWS, in Elastic Kubernetes Services. We have general control if we want to give access to any user. Also, whenever we push a container or image, we can create any ingress and then connect to our cluster by the Load Balancer directly.

It is very easy, and we can deliver access to customers or users. Also, we can autoscale for any deployment or compute service. In addition, the control panel is completely managed by AWS, and we only have to think about a data plan and what type of deployments, services, and DaemonSets we need.

The main area of improvement is that a cluster is required on-premises, which takes a lot of time. For example, we must drain the total nodes during an upgrade from version 1.21 to version 1.22 with on-premises. After draining the total nodes, our container will shut down, and it will be recreated after upgrading. But with the AWS Kubernetes Services, the upgrade from version 1.21 to 1.22 is completed with one click. It's straightforward for the users.

In any secure services, nodes are working on the EC2 services. Whatever the EC2 services, the specified AMI is available. This AMI is an auto-security package that is automatically upgraded per the company's need. It is also secure.

We have used this solution for one year and use versions 1.15 to 1.22. It is deployed in the public cloud only, in AWS. We were initially working on an on-premises basis of Kubernetes and started working in Elastic Kubernetes in AWS. It is a managed service, and its control panel is managed in AWS. We have to work for our data plan only.

We have about 20 users pushing their container to Elastic Kubernetes Cluster. Most companies want source codes like Python, Node.js, and Java and push them to the Elastic Container Services. It makes it easy for the CI/CD pipeline to build and push images to Elastic Kubernetes Services. We recently started the containerization in Elastic Kubernetes Services.

Regarding technical support, we have the job, role, and responsibilities within our company.

If there is an issue, we must determine whether the solution is working correctly or not. We check if our node group has more or less workload than we need and if the autoscale is defined correctly. We can degrade these instances per our requirement if the node group is less. We added Grafana and Prometheus to monitor the total CPU, memory, and nodes. We can monitor requests, CPU utilization, and whether our node is behaving correctly or if we need any more memory. We also look for any issues with the HTTP request or time out.

The calculation of the pricing is dependent upon instance type. So when we make a cluster without defining any instance type, it will default enter a large instance type. So as per our requirement, we can create our node group and define our instance types per our workload.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten. Amazon EKS is the best service because it has proper security packages and manages AMI. Also, I'm working on GCP and have seen GKE services. With Amazon EKS AWS, we can do a lot of integration with our Kubernetes Cluster.

It's a great service because we can do a lot of things using it. It's easy to create clusters and services in pods there.

So, the main purpose is to create clusters and services and define some pods there.

We reduced the cost by using one cluster instead of using different services and different virtual machines in a client. So, Amazon EKS helped our organization reduce costs. 

This is the way we can create a cluster because we don't need to pay attention to the control plane. We only need to deploy the services in the worker nodes and configure some configurations, easy configurations, and the cluster is done to be published.

Basically, AWS provides all features that we have prepared.

There is room for improvement in stability. I faced some problems with the App. The problem is actually the app, with the different teams fixing it.

I have been using this solution for 18 months. I work on different projects. Basically, we create a structure and per clients, and we move to another project. So we did different projects for how long of the year.

We are currently using version 1.24, but we are migrating to the latest version, which is 1.28.70.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. I faced some problems with the App. The problem is actually the app with the different teams fixing it, but I would say the Kubernetes - it's ten. The service is ten. But if everything is considered, it's eight.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It is perfect. Moreover, more than one hundred users have access per hour. 

We use this solution every day. Thus, we use the solution to its maximum potential. 

We did the research for Azure, but all the structure and other resources were applied in AWS, so we kept it in the same provider.

We also used a local structure, but we're at a short time. And the infrastructure had already been done. I only need to support the application. It's full.

The thing that takes more time to be constructed with the code is minutes and hours to provide the EKS code, but with the structure is really fast.

Basically, it used the code. They used the TerraForm code because we work with ESA, and, basically, the most important part for us is the code.

We used the help of a third party, like, the partners of Amazon. 

We required four people for the deployment process. However, the maintenance depends on the number of clusters and resources. So, two people are enough for the maintenance of the solution. 

I would rate the pricing model a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is very expensive.

It was rather expensive; compared to GCP and Azure, it's a little more expensive. The price can be a problem for small-sized businesses. 

There are no additional costs to the standard license. 

So I work as a DevOps engineer. But basically, using TerraForm or other tools like that, I never worked with another provider as Google and Microsoft. So, basically, I use AWS. 

Actually, there are a lot of reports that I use every day. So we use tools related to that, like load balancers, ECRs, and EKS— so different resource things.

It's a great service. Some services are more expensive compared to other providers. But in general, it's the best option for medium or large enterprises.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

The solution can be described as a microservice, and it is also a fully containerized platform. The solution can be described as a stateless service. Amazon EKS can be a great solution for deployments since it supports autoscaling and keeps scaling as well. In my company, we only pay for the resources we use, and owing to such a concept, we use the solution in our company.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it allows developers to shift applications. The value of the solution is good when compared to tools deployed on an on-premises model.

If you compare Amazon EKS with OpenShift, the latter provides users with a solution that is fully managed through automation. Amazon EKS is not a solution that can be fully managed through automation, making it an area of concern where improvement is required. Amazon EKS should be manageable through a web portal or web interface, a feature that exists in OpenShift.

Amazon EKS should be available as a fully managed service since we use Helm chart to deploy the product in our company right now.

The initial setup phase of the product is an area where certain improvements can be made.

As a consultant, I use Amazon EKS, depending on the project requirements of my company. I have used Amazon EKS within the past twelve months. I am a customer of Amazon.

The stability of the solution is good. I can't comment much on the stability part of the solution since there is a different team in my company that takes care of the maintenance part of the solution.

I won't be able to comment on the scalability of the solution. I haven't had any reasons to deal with the product's scalability options.

I did not meet with any issues when trying to connect with the solution's technical support. At times, there may be some delays in response from the technical support team. I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

In the past, I was using another solution. I switched to Amazon from a different solution. Amazon's support is good. Amazon also provides a number of managed services.

I rate the initial setup phase of the product a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The initial setup phase of the product was a bit difficult.

The solution is deployed on Jenkins and CI/CD.

The product's initial setup phase was taken care of by one of our company's in-house teams.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

Amazon EKS is basically a model provided by Amazon that allows you to create and deploy multiple microservices and manage containers. Once the Kubernetes is installed, we can directly create the container, set up ports, and set up new services. We currently have Java containers running.

We have more than 500 people using this solution. We are on version 21.

I like the scalability they're currently providing. Integration was very easy. It was a good experience. 

The connectivity could be better.

I have been using Amazon EKS for more than two years.

It's stable enough. We have had network connectivity issues twice. We weren't able to figure out what went wrong there, and it caused a problem initially. When we restarted it, it began working again.

The scalability is good.

We have called technical support a couple of times. We had an issue with integration with Lambda. But we took the help of AWS and it was resolved.

We have also used the IBM private cloud, but it wasn't user friendly.

Setup can take half an hour to an hour.

For deployment, our technical team was made up of 15 people.

My company paid for the license. 

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I would definitely recommend this solution. It's a very good application, and the scalability is very good.