Amazon EKS Reviews

We deploy different solutions on the EKS cluster for our clients to use.

Since it is a managed service of AWS, Amazon EKS helps us in the managing and autoscaling of services. We don't have to worry about multiple things like managing the nodes or IP addresses and can focus on our work.

Through Amazon EKS, we can have the blue-green deployment very easily.

The management of the nodes in Amazon EKS should be improved. AWS should reduce the constant upgrades of the nodes of Amazon EKS or EC2 machines.

I have been using Amazon EKS for almost two years.

I rate Amazon EKS a seven out of ten for stability.

I rate Amazon EKS a nine out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is very good.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward for us because we use Terraform scripts, which we have written and can reuse. It is the same for the console.

If your application goes to production, you will definitely see an ROI with Amazon EKS.

The solution's pricing is fair enough and a little less costly.

I would recommend Amazon EKS to other users.

Overall, I rate Amazon EKS an eight out of ten.

The use case for Amazon EKS is for a payment gateway corporation whose applications run on microservices. Their software team develops cloud-native applications. They use Amazon's public cloud for these applications but find it expensive. They want a less expensive solution for their customers.

We suggest using Amazon EKS open-source solutions. By using these solutions on-premises, they don't have to pay Amazon. 

Amazon EKS is a useful solution for modern, cloud-native applications. It offers both horizontal and vertical scaling, which is a big advantage. The tool can also help manage costs while maintaining high availability.

Integrating Amazon EKS with other AWS services is easy if you know how to connect your applications and understand programming. It depends on how your application uses modern programming languages.

The main thing to improve with Amazon EKS is the price. However, these services can be very expensive. For example, in countries like Turkey, the cost is too high. That's why we offer our cloud solutions locally. We developed hybrid solutions, but their prices are still very high.

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is very scalable. We have two customers for Amazon EKS. 

We don't use support. Our customers use it. 

The tool's deployment is easy. The deployment process is very simple. First, create an account. It's very organic. After that, choose the service that will be used for the project and create new services. Provide your credentials to connect to the environment. If you want to use a private link, you'll need to use a private connection.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten. If you want to start quickly and have time constraints, you can use Amazon solutions because no time or effort is needed to prepare your environment for the market, and no hardware or infrastructure requirements are required. 

It can affect team productivity with a few customers. Productivity depends on the customers' knowledge. If their developers or software team are familiar with using hyperscale issues, it is very productive to use it.

If you need off-site backup solutions, object storage, or to check your data's secondary version for disaster recovery, you can use AWS Backup or Amazon EKS service, like S3 buckets. It's very useful.

Amazon EKS can be used to implement and create clusters. It is also used to deploy and secure the already configured applications. EKS is a cloud-based container management service that integrates with Kubernetes to deploy applications. It automatically manages and scales clusters of infrastructure resources on AWS with Kubernetes.

EKS eliminates the need to install, operate, or maintain a Kubernetes control plane on AWS. Amazon handles everything. We just need to know how we can make it more secure, and we can use it to deploy your applications. It scales automatically, making it one of the best services.

Assigning roles and responsibilities to interact with a created cluster as a user over a command prompt is cumbersome on AWS. Initially, we create a user to interact with a cluster. Since everyone can't use the cluster, we need to assign some permissions to that specific user. It is very cumbersome to assign permissions to users to interact with a cluster. We always get errors, and it takes many days to resolve that permission issue before the user can start interacting with the cluster.

I have been using Amazon EKS for eight years.

Amazon EKS is a stable solution.

Amazon EKS is a scalable solution.

The solution’s technical support is good.

The solution’s initial setup is easy, but assigning permissions to users is difficult.

Amazon EKS is not a cheap solution.

Google Cloud Platform has a service similar to EKS called GKE. It's very easy to implement permissions in GKE as compared to EKS.

Overall, I rate Amazon EKS a seven out of ten.

We use EKS in our company to run containerized applications. I work in the container ecosystem team, and we manage EKS clusters for our developer teams so they don't have to. We provide them with the necessary tools to run on top of the cluster.

EKS helps us simplify and speed up cluster management. We don't have to take care of cluster updates; we just initiate the update, and AWS handles it. The same goes for some of the AWS-managed add-ons.

The biggest improvement is that we now have more time. When we shifted the responsibility of cluster management and updates to AWS, we had more time to develop solutions that make life easier for the developers. 

Application deployment is more automatic. They don't have to issue cluster commands; they can simply do a commit into our internal GitHub Enterprise, and our tooling will deploy or update the application on the cluster. That's probably the biggest benefit because we had time to develop such solutions.

From my personal perspective, I think it's good that we can use AWS CLI to manage the cluster, and that way, we can automate the work via scripts. Of course, the way that we just issue a command and AWS handles the work, like with cluster updates, is also valuable. That's probably one of the reasons why we use it.

Sometimes I have trouble because, in our corporate network, there are various networks, etcetera. It's difficult to connect to some of the clusters, and it's easier to go through the UI when troubleshooting something. At some points, the UI seems limited to me with the functions it provides. 

You can get information like what kind of port is running on the cluster, but I haven't really explored the UI so far, so it's difficult for me to see the logs, for example. Or sometimes, you are only limited to the basic Kubernetes things. 

We have certain customizations installed in the cluster, and for that, you really have to use kubectl from the command line. You are not able to use the EKS UI to list certain custom resources. So maybe there can be some kind of improvement, but maybe it's just me that I haven't really explored the UI that much.

I have been using it since February. 

I don't really remember any issue with EKS, the product from AWS as is. There can be some issues when there is a bigger outage on the AWS side; it's either some kind of network outage when we cannot reach AWS itself or something similar, but I wouldn't blame EKS for it.

When we had problems with the cluster itself, I think it was more about some issue that either we as a team introduced by human error, from some configuration mistake, or our customers sometimes made mistakes. And maybe there are issues when the application running on top of EKS somehow gets into some loop or something and then doesn't work correctly, but I wouldn't really attribute that to EKS.

Because I've been in the team for a short amount of time, I don't really remember any big issue that was caused by EKS itself in the past six months at least.

It is scalable. We use the cluster autoscaler tool that spins up a new node when we need more, and that works nicely. So I think from the scalability point of view, it's okay. 

In the last six months, I don't really see any issue with scalability. We run around one hundred clusters. Some of them are quite small, really just the basics where we are running free master nodes in the free availability zones, just to make things according to best practices. So, really a minimal cluster. 

And there are also some really big clusters with over a hundred worker nodes. Overall, I think it's quite big. And with EKS, we are able to manage it quite well.

I have some experience with AWS support, and it was good. We were trying to solve something with one of the add-ons, and I think we solved it within a couple of days. We even had a call with one of the support engineers. So I think it worked out well. 

The issue was regarding one of the AWS-managed add-ons. I remember that we clearly had some kind of misunderstanding between us and technical support, and it seemed like either we were not able to explain it correctly or the guy wasn't able to understand us. But I remember that somehow we solved that issue. So at the end, it was okay.

Neutral

The deployment process of EKS was done before I joined the team.

For me, EKS UI is nice, and it was quite easy for me to get familiar with. I find the AWS CLI quite nice to use as well. I've been working in IT for some time now, so I have some level of experience. I guess these things come sort of naturally to me now, such as how to use the tools that are provided by companies. It's usually no issue for me.

From the maintenance point of view, I don't know much about how things are backed up, etcetera. I think that is exactly why we use EKS because we don't really have to take care of cluster backups. We can simply issue a command, and the cluster will update. If we were to do cluster updates manually, it would be more work. We would have to update the worker nodes and then update the master node one by one. AWS now handles all of this. So I think from the maintenance point of view, it's great, and that's why we use it because it's now much more simple and faster for us.

We still see the benefits of using this solution because we are using it. And we actually plan to transfer all our workloads to EKS if things were ideal. But for some legal reasons, we still have to manage some on-premise clusters, but I think the benefits are there.

If you have the money, I would recommend the EKS product to other users who are looking into implementing it. It's a good tool. It really takes some of the management burden off your back.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

The main use case is Cloud and IT applications.

It's a faster solution to adopt on native applications.

I would like to see a cloud setup bank management feature.

I have been using Amazon EKS for six years.

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

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

There is a return on investment.

Before EKS, we evaluated AKS and CKS.

Review the organization's strategy with your strategy, whether it is oriented to the portability of your applications. Overall, I would rate Amazon EKS a nine out of ten.

I use EKS as an application management system and a second application server. It's connected to Amazon RDS. 

EKS has security features that you can't find in competing solutions.

I'm having difficulty getting my AWS clusters to communicate with my local machine. 

I have used EKS for three years.

Amazon EKS is scalable. We have about 20,000 users. 

Setting up EKS is simple compared to OpenShift. It isn't too complex. We have a hybrid setup due to government data rules. I deployed EKS alone.

I rate EKS seven out of 10 for affordability. Amazon EKS costs us $730 a year. 

I rate Amazon EKS nine out of 10.

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.

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.