What is our primary use case?
One of the use cases is autoscaling. It has been quite robust and easy to use for autoscaling. Second, within the console itself, the whole developer experience is far superior as compared to other cloud providers.
The third, mainly from a networking perspective, is the ability to use multiple regions for load balancing and networking capabilities. I can switch between multiple regions as and when required.
For specific use cases, in certain types of machines, we don't always get the required compute power. But, it depends from region to region, and sometimes there are resource crunches, and you may not get the required configuration as you need.
How has it helped my organization?
The benefits have been mainly from the faster adoption or the ease with which I have deployed this for consumers or my engineering teams. The pace with which I can bring up an infra, that is, the time to market, has been important for me. So that is fast. Again, it's more time-based only, but, yes, the ease with which I was able to migrate from on-prem to Google Compute Engine was quite seamless without having to worry about whether my workloads would continue to run the same or not. So, that was a seamless experience.
Another one I would specifically highlight is the fact that, from a perspective, most of the cloud providers give that, but I probably am a bit biased towards Google and the way in which it has its storage layer linked. So, the persistent disk for the local SSDs provides better throughput as compared to some of the other providers, plus it now has these GPUs and TPUs as well. So that helps a lot.
What is most valuable?
From a feature perspective, I find API integration, automation capabilities, and features like preemptive and Spot instances valuable. Migration tools have also been useful.
I also value the ease of adoption and deployment for my engineering teams. The speed at which I can bring up instances is crucial. Migrating from on-premises to Compute Engine was seamless. Additionally, Google's storage layer, including persistent disks and local SSDs, provides better throughput compared to other providers. The availability of GPUs and TPUs is another advantage.
On the console itself, there is something called the recommendations that it provides. So, if I'm underutilizing or overutilizing a machine, it gives me insight into whether I should under-provision my machine or switch to a lower config machine to save some cost. So, that recommendation feature is quite useful. So, overall, I like the solution's automation, migration, and API integration.
What needs improvement?
In terms of improvement, one is definitely the licensing piece. So there is a feature, the BYOL (Bring Your Own License) licensing piece, to bring your own license. It is not that straightforward. It requires some support from Google to get it sorted, access those licenses, and configure those licenses. It is not a very straightforward process. So, BYOL definitely needs some sort of improvement out there.
There can be many additional features in future releases. So GCE has been the core, pure module; from a feature set perspective, it has matured enough. But if there could be an auto-switching capability. Autoscaling is there, but it will differ or be restricted to certain types of machines.
So, for example, I use an N2 class machine or a memory-optimized M1 or M2. It will only scale in that particular configuration itself. The configuration might not change. Now, I should have that capability depending on the workload and what I deploy. So, depending on the type of workload, Google should recommend that this should be the recommended configuration based on which the instance can be set up. So, more of an automated configuration or a recommendation is something that I'll look for in future releases.
So, one feature I would like to see is auto-switching, or auto-scaling. The second feature is a recommendation based on the application.
For how long have I used the solution?
It has been using Google Compute Engine for more than seven years now, right from its inception. I've been an early user of it.
In the past few years, I've been both a partner and a customer. I've experienced both sides. I've used it as a partner, implementing services using Compute Engine, and I've also used it as an end-user to build products. I was working as a partner more than 18 months ago, but currently, I am using it as a customer.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Stability would differ from region to region, but it is almost on a scale of around nine out of ten.
In certain regions, there are resource and bandwidth issues. That's why I'm rating it on the lower side on some markings on that. Otherwise, it's fairly stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. The solution offers a high level of scalability, it's able to adapt to our needs.
We have multiple workloads running; on average, any workload running has around 50 to 1000 users. The solution has been used quite significantly because our primary workloads are with GCE. The computing infrastructure relies on GCE. We do have it as a backup site as well. So, 80% of the workload runs on GCE.
We already, like, kind of maxed out our current usage. It will depend on the business strategy or any new application that comes in. We'll definitely expand in that case. But, at the moment, depending on the needs, we have fairly maxed it out.
How are customer service and support?
The customer service and support are fairly good. We are satisfied with the services they provide. They are fast and effective.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were using certain shared hosting services. So, something like what the older generations were using. And then we decided to move to the cloud. So, there were some old-generation computers that were used.
We mainly switched to Google Compute Engine because we wanted to go to the cloud. One was the cloud that had all kinds of better scalability costs and everything. So, combining all this with moving to the cloud was a better option.
How was the initial setup?
In terms of the deployment process, we have two major deployment processes. One is via the console; the other is via the command line interface. And the third is using any Terraform tools like Terraform modules. So I've used all three of them.
Personally, I'm comfortable with all three. Terraform requires some upskilling and some learning curve. However, the console is quite straightforward to implement and use, as well as the command line interface. So, specifically, using the shell, like, a piece of cake.
What about the implementation team?
The people required for the deployment will depend on the type of implementation and the size of the implementation. I have done it as an individual. I've done deployments with a team of ten engineers as well. Therefore, it depends on the scale of the application itself.
To deploy the lowest spectrum, it would take a few hours. The highest has some additional dependencies; it would take a span of five days or so.
Moreover, the maintenance is fairly minimal. Very rarely, if I have to change certain configurations or if I have to change certain OS parameters based on the applications, only then it requires maintenance. Otherwise, there are instances in which I have been running for the last three years and stable enough.
What was our ROI?
I cannot quantify ROI, but our application's performance has improved since we moved from an on-prem to a cloud. So, that's one major ROI for us. We saw approximately 60 to 70% improvement.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing is competitive in nature. In certain cases, AWS might be cheaper. In certain cases, GCE might be cheaper. And depending on the region you are hosting, you can get that cost benefit.
I would rate the pricing a five out of ten because it is neutral. The price is fair for the function it provides for the services we receive, and the price is okay for this product. As an end user, I would want the pricing to be cheaper.
If we need that premium support, those are some additional costs that we would incur or any networking costs that can be incurred. But nothing apart from that.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We did evaluate a few other options. It was mainly AWS that we evaluated. We also evaluated DigitalOcean. We looked more from the ease of usage, the console, and all perspectives; GCE was on the higher end of the spectrum.
What other advice do I have?
So, there are three key takeaways. One is to meet all your use cases from a functionality perspective; the solution is robust enough.
Second is that it is quite intuitive and easy to use from a development perspective as well as from an operational aspect as well. So, the second is from the ease of usage perspective.
Third, from the innovation side of things, GCP has been at the forefront. Whether it is about cost or the features; this solution always been on top of its game. So, they were the ones who brought this per-minute pricing itself. So, the solution has always been on the innovation side of the cloud.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Google
*Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.