What is our primary use case?
Basically, we use it for our data lakes because users are not always making the best decisions money-wise. They mainly look at the performance of their environments, and they select very performant machines or storage classes even if they don't need them.
And so the cost optimizer will tell us if that user is using a very expensive storage or if it's not using not using it. Then, of course, we will force the users to go to cheaper storage. That's one thing.
An end user always or, in most cases, always selects the best because he thinks or believes he needs it.
But as he is not a technical person, in many cases, he is not able to decide if he needs it or not. The cost controller is very interesting because it will show exactly what the end user is using and what he needs. So, that is a very, very good product. We make a lot of money out of it.
How has it helped my organization?
For our specific needs, Kubecost has everything we require. Performance monitoring across CPU, network, and storage is comprehensive.
What is most valuable?
I like the overall product because I can select what monitoring should be enabled and whatnot.
In our case, we really focus on performance because it's clear that the price is related to most performance setups. So the more performance, the more expensive.
So we look into the performance that the customer needs, and then based upon that feedback from the remote control, we change the parameters. And even the end user will not notice it is not using it, so we just make money without any impact on the end users.
What needs improvement?
In future releases, I would like to see faster monitoring because it could potentially improve overall stability in the production environment.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for a year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. While the monitoring itself has a slight performance impact on your environment, it's inherent to the system and unavoidable.
Faster monitoring would minimize its impact on production environments.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is okay. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. For cost optimization, not many people use it. The whole environment uses it, but only two or three specialized people actively analyze the data.
It's for specialized personnel, and with that team, we can monitor the entire environment effectively.
How was the initial setup?
Understanding the applications, data flows, and user base is key before deployment.
You need a thorough understanding of your company's size, target audience, and software/data flow to define effective monitoring choices and identify improvement opportunities. This requires skilled personnel to analyze and implement.
What about the implementation team?
We handled it internally thanks to our in-house expertise. However, I imagine most customers would benefit from external consultants or third-party services.
Deployment time is longer because we have to decide the right monitoring parameters. This has a significant impact on results, so expertise is crucial.
Third-party consultants or specialized personnel might be necessary for most customers as they may lack the in-house knowledge for optimal parameter selection.
What was our ROI?
For an AWS setup, simply moving to the cloud without optimization can be expensive. The real savings come from using Kubecost features like autoscaling and serverless functions to optimize your resource usage. If you treat it like a data center migration without fine-tuning, it might cost more.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The price is reasonable, considering the value it delivers.
In all honesty, once you have your optimal design, you could just turn it off and then activate it maybe once every six months or once every year to make a check again.
You only need it in the beginning. Once people are optimized and fine-tuned, you can stop monitoring. So, it's very well designed. It's a good product. It's it's running nicely. It gives us fair numbers of advice on how to improve costs.
There's a small licensing fee, but you don't need to run it 24/7. Initially, you might use it full-time for a few months to gather data, then switch to periodic monitoring like monthly or bi-monthly. Ultimately, the cost savings from optimization outweigh the licensing fee.
The price scales based on your monitoring parameters, such as the frequency and duration of data collection. The more data you collect, the more you pay for it.
What other advice do I have?
Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. It's an excellent product.
Make sure you have dedicated people with a good understanding of your environment to use it effectively.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
*Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
