Kubernetes Reviews

We are developing some microservices for the banking sector. We are developing microservices and deploying all of them into Kubernetes. We're looking to make these projects scalable, so we are designing the policies for scaling. Also, we are deploying some front-end items. We are integrating Kubernetes on Azure, with the keyboard and storage. This means we have to use the invoice controller to properly route the request to the final destination.

Also, we deploy a database, however, it's not the main goal; it's just for a backup plan as we've had some troubles with the database, which is currently in hosted in Oracle Cloud.

The full concept behind Kubernetes is quite good in terms of trying to really take full advantage of the resources you have. You can separate your company by names, et cetera. 

The scalability seems quite good also.

It seems that there is a community behind the solution that is supporting a lot of additional features that can be included in Kubernetes to integrate with other providers or software.

The price is something they need to improve. 

I'm not a very technical guy. Graphically, the product could be more friendly for the users. 

We'd like it if they had some sort of web management tool, I don't know if there is already one out there, however, it would help a lot.

I've used the solution for around four months.

It has been very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale. It's not a problem.

We have been going into production right now, and I know there are other projects currently at the bank with the same infrastructure using Kubernetes. We're increasing usage.

While there is support from the community, I really don't know much in terms of support and if, for example, Microsoft through Azure will provide something. We have a provider that we work with that is in charge of the support. That said, it's something like a blue layer. They set up everything, however, they didn't do anything further like channel configurations or deployments. 

I didn't properly set up the cluster. It is a service from Azure. There is another team that is in charge of setting up everything about the cluster. I have only been configuring some of the requirements for the cluster.

The setup is quite small right now. We also have a pipeline supported by Jenkins and there is one person working on that side for the other configurations. So we have about two or three people (who are engineers) working on the right now.

I'm a reseller.

I've been reading a lot about the subject since it is new to me. There is a lot of good documentation. Of course, some of the Kubernetes webpage documentation is sometimes confusing as it's not that straight in terms of what you have to do. Still, it helps to take some lessons from some platforms Microsoft has. People need some training on the subject.

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

I am using Kubernetes for particular projects.

The most valuable feature of Kubernetes is automation. It is the best tool for automation.

I have been using Kubernetes for approximately two years.

The stability of Kubernetes is very good. It does not go down.

All of our DevOps engineers are using Kubernetes in my company.

The initial setup of Kubernetes is difficult. However, if you are used to the flow then it is easier. The length of time it takes for the implementation depends on the project.

My company chose Kubernetes because it has automatic deployment.

If it is your first time using Kubernetes then you will have to study how to use it and learn how to do scripts.

I rate Kubernetes a seven out of ten.

Kubernetes is used for container management. The use case depends on the project. My company was releasing products that work with Kubernetes.

Kubernetes is scalable and the elasticity is sustainable.

Kubernetes is a complex solution. The product needs to be more manageable and user-friendly.

Currently, I work as a systems engineer. I have been using Kubernetes for two years.

Kubernetes is stable. Usually the solution requires maintenance, however, in my environment, Nutanix covers the maintenance like upgrading and patching.

The solution is scalable. A user can start their business with Kubernetes and the workload can expand as the business expands.

The solution is open source.

Kubernetes is a complex solution. If someone is looking to build Kubernetes in a production environment, I suggest they choose some partners like cloud providers or software solution vendors such as Red Hat or VMware. A lot of system integrators provide a solution, including technical support for Kubernetes. I recommend you find the right partner or provider.

I would rate Kubernetes a nine out of 10 overall.

Kubernetes is a container management platform, and all our microservices are deployed on this platform.

There are features that come out of the box with Kubernetes, with respect to scaling, reliability, etc. It's the leading container management platform. There are other competing ones, but this is the leading one.

It has multiple instances of the application running. If one of them goes down, the other one automatically spins up.

It would be nice if they could make it easier for developers and infrastructure staff to automate some of the pieces that they have to do manually at the moment.

This is a solution I've been using for four or five years.

It's stable. It's managed by the cloud provider.

Depending on the SLAs with respect to scalability, we can scale up and down as per our demand. We could increase the number of nodes instantaneously for our requirements. In our company, we have 5,000 people around the world using Kubernetes.

As for initial setup, If it is on an on-premises environment then it's a little bit tricky, but if it's on public cloud, then they have an offering where you can spin up clusters within minutes. Those are managed by the cloud providers. On cloud platforms, the initial setup is easy, but if you want to spin up your own cluster and manage that, then it could be a lot of work. Spinning up might be easy, but maintaining that cluster could be a lot of work.

Look at your use cases to make sure that Kubernetes is required. It is generally required when there are concerns with scalability or when there is a need for a solution that is highly available and highly scalable. If this is the case, then it makes sense to use Kubernetes.

It could be used as a global tool as well. Some of the nodes would be on-premises and on the cloud or multi-cloud.

However, if you have a simple application which is used by your own company and some internal applications, and is not used by many people, and scalability is not the concern, then you shouldn't go for Kubernetes.

I would rate this solution at eight on a scale from one to ten.

Kubernetes is for orchestration. We use it for various large microservice-based architectures and web services. That's the ideal use case, but it's suitable for any kind of service that can be decomposed and needs to be scaled. Of course, it's much easier to deploy services that are stateless. It requires more skills to deploy anything stateful or data-based.

Kubernetes is a bit complex, and there's a steep learning curve. At the same time, I cannot imagine how it could be easier.  You need many add-ons to it, and the commercial releases of Kubernetes should address that. 

For example, Red Hat OpenShift comes with all the add-ons included, but Kubernetes itself is free software so, of course, you need some skills to use it.

I've been using Kubernetes for four years.

Kubernetes is highly stable, but it's a complicated system with complex dynamics, so it needs to be monitored constantly.

Kubernetes' scalability is good. We have participated in operating clusters with hundreds of nodes.

Kubernetes is an open-source solution, so there is no tech support. You have to look up solutions online. You can purchase tech support, but we haven't used that service so far.

We used Marathon Mesos in the past, but it's obsolete these days.

Installing Kubernetes is complex. You need extensive skills and knowledge to do it from scratch.I didn't do install the solution by myself. A colleague is an expert in this, so he handled it. 

You can probably deploy the bare-bones cluster within days, but it requires some study, which can take much longer. And if you want extra features, it will take more time. Kubernetes has a lot of features, so it could take three days or three weeks to deploy if you keep adding to it.

We are focusing on open-source Kubernetes that doesn't require a license, but we use OpenShift for customers. It's a licensed, supported solution by Red Hat.

I rate Kubernetes nine out of 10. I recommend Kubernetes, but it's not for the faint of heart. Deploying Kubernetes from scratch is a real technical challenge because you need to understand lots of technology. 

It's much easier to start with Kubernetes from some cloud provider or use a commercial solution like OpenShift. Doing the pure vanilla open-source Kubernetes is possible but requires expertise, which is hard to come by.

We deploy our software solution in the Kubernetes environment. 

Honestly, there is not much I like about Kubernetes. It's very complicated to deal with. I just do it because I have to.

There is plenty of room for improvement with the configuration and runtime monitoring. That would make Kubernetes much easier to use. 

I have been dealing with Kubernetes for almost two years. 

Once you get it configured properly, it's a stable solution. The problem is that getting there is complicated.

Kubernetes is scalable, but again, it's such a complicated product.

I've never had to use the tech support.

I would not say that the initial setup is straightforward: the configuration can take me either 45 minutes or a week and a half. 

I try to do it by myself, but I often wind up having to look up directions.

I have not seen a return on investment with Kubernetes.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We are using it for hosting applications. Customers are hosted on the Kubernetes Service AKS.

They've introduced an enterprise option, which is quite helpful. 

It is always up to date. They're also automatically updating when the new version is ready.

There's a lot of community support if you need to get help. 

There are a couple of improvements there also need to be at play.

For example, if we deploy without RBACs to the cluster, it can't be deployed. When there's like GCPW or AWS, there is room. Even though we have deployed the clusters without RBACs enabled, we can add the RBACs later. However, Microsoft has limitations. There are features in Google Cloud or AWS that aren't in Azure. They need to implement a couple more tools in Azure. 

The application gateway, app gateway, needs to be improved. It's not fully developed yet.

I've been using the solution for around two years. 

The stability is good. It's always up to date and running well. There are no glitches and it doesn't rah or freeze. We did have one bug once however it has since been fixed. It is reliable.

We have 18 to 20 people using the solution and they are in DevOps. However, I've never tried to scale it. I'm not sure how well it would scale or not. 

We have used community help in the past and found it useful. They are helpful and responsive when you need to get a hold of them.

Positive

The deployment has a moderate level of difficulty. It takes around 30 minutes to 40 minutes to get everything up and running.

We pay a monthly fee in order to sue the solution. 

We're not a partner. We are end-users.

I'm not sure of the exact version of the solution we are using. 

Microsoft is hosted on their environment. We can't host it in our own environment. We are using the Azure Kubernetes AKS. If it's Azure, it needs to be hosted on its own Azure Cloud. We can't host it, for example, on-premises. 

I would advise potential new users to learn about it and try it out.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Kubernetes' most valuable features are scaling, deployment, and container management. Its integration with other pipeline tools is also good.

The setup process could be improved as it's quite complex, especially for newbies. In the next release, Kubernetes should include automatic deployment.

I've been working with Kubernetes for around a year and a half.

Kubernetes is a stable solution.

Kubernetes is easy to scale.

Kubernetes' technical support is good but could be a bit more responsive.

Positive

The initial setup was a bit complex.

I would rate Kubernetes as eight out of ten.

We use Kubernetes for hosting microservices-based applications. Kubernetes varies depending on which distribution you use. We have distributors that make these custom distributions, and I don't have any special requirements.

I like Kubernetes' scalability, built-in redundancy, and ease of deployment.

I've been working on Kubernetes for maybe five years.

It depends on how you set Kubernetes up, but it's usually stable.

Community-based Kubernetes is quite hard to set up. We usually use a version of Kubernetes provided by some distributor because they have built-in assistance for the installation. It's much easier, and most of the installation is done automatically.

If it's a cloud-based solution, you just set up a cluster, then click a button, and it's done in 20 minutes. But if it's an on-prem solution where you have to configure the hardware and hypervisor, it can take longer. If you have a cloud solution, then it's just to a click of a button, but the on-prem version could be simplified.

I rate Kubernetes seven out of 10. More and more applications will be based on virtual machines using container-based solutions. That's the way forward, so I would recommend Kubernetes.

My primary use case of this solution is for infrastructure implementations - we allocate an EC2 instance and then define how many worker nodes are needed to run the application and the managed nodes.

More automation could improve the product - specifically, it would be useful to be able to shut down any IT machines that are currently not in use.

I have been using Kubernetes for around a year and a half.

I think this solution is stable.

I think Kubernetes is scalable in a vertical manner, depending on the type of instances in the worker mode. If you don't have resources, you can certainly add another worker node and expand the cluster.

With the latest edition of Kubernetes, there is a concern in terms of infrastructure regarding AWS support. There is no specific contact point for issues with Kubernetes, so we have to rely on the internet and blogs in order to work out what has gone wrong. 

The setup was not straightforward. There were certain challenges in setting up the product requiring a lot of time on proper configuration and compiling. The first time we deployed took a lot of time but now we can do it in around a week.

You don't need a license for Kubernetes, but you do have to pay for usage.

I would rate Kubernetes as ten out of ten.