OpenShift OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

OpenShift is the #3 ranked solution in PaaS Services. PeerSpot users give OpenShift an average rating of 8.4 out of 10. OpenShift is most commonly compared to Amazon AWS: OpenShift vs Amazon AWS. OpenShift is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 78% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a financial services firm, accounting for 24% of all views.
OpenShift Buyer's Guide

Download the OpenShift Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2022

What is OpenShift?

OpenShift is Red Hat's Kubernetes platform that provides a cloud environment for development, hosting, and scaling applications. The solution enables a cloud-like experience regardless of the location where it has been deployed, including in the cloud, on premises, or at the edge. It allows developers to select where to build, deploy, and run applications through a consistent experience, supported by full-stack automated operations, and self-service provisioning.

OpenShift employs an open hybrid cloud strategy which is built on the foundation of technologies including Linux, containers, and automation. This approach provides clients with a flexible selection of where to run their applications. Applications can be built on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and are automatically compatible with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. OpenShift enables automation inside and outside clients' Kubernetes clusters.

The solution works with traditional, modernized, and cloud-native applications. It supports a wide variety of workloads, including Java, artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML), and databases. Due to the vast ecosystem of technology partners that OpenShift supports, clients can benefit from automated deployment and life-cycle management. This product improves the security of the full application life cycle by decreasing operational risk. This is achieved by shifting security left and automating development, security, and operations (DevSecOps).

OpenShift Features

OpenShift facilitates clients’ application-running processes through various features. Some of the product’s features include:

  • Backup and recovery: This feature ensures logical and physical protection through containers, Kubernetes, and serverless present opportunities. It is used to meet recovery point objectives (RPO) and recovery time objectives (RTO).

  • CI/CD pipelines: This feature of OpenShift automates the continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines, accelerating the time for application development.

  • GitOps: The GitOps feature increases security and reliability for applications through tools like Git repositories, Kubernetes, and CI/CD. The product includes this feature to allow developers more freedom in app development through tracing and accounting for the application life cycle in the Git repository.

  • Helm: Helm is a package and installs manager that simplifies the deployment of containerized apps. It is included in the features of OpenShift to assist users with interoperability and support cloud-native applications from independent software vendors (ISVs).

  • Sandboxed containers: OpenShift offers sandboxed containers based on Kata Containers to provide an additional layer of isolation for applications while meeting high-security requirements.

  • Windows containers: The product offers this feature to facilitate users when running their Windows applications by providing them a scheduled, orchestrated, and managed environment.

  • Security: OpenShift offers various operations through which clients can ensure the safety of their data and applications. They include container host and platform multitenancy, security and trusted content sources, security of the container registry, the build pipeline, and data, managing security container deployments, and more.

  • Service Mesh: This feature provides a uniform way for clients to connect, manage, and observe microservices-based applications. It also provides detailed behavioral insight.

  • Operators: This feature automates the development, configuration, and management of Kubernetes-native applications.

  • Virtualization: OpenShift allows users to run and manage virtual machine (VM) and container workloads side by side.

OpenShift Benefits

OpenShift provides the companies and users utilizing it with various benefits. These benefits include the following:

  • OpenShift provides scalability for applications, allowing them to run across hundreds of nodes in seconds.

  • The product offers flexibility by simplifying the deployment and management of hybrid infrastructure and providing self-managed or fully-managed service.

  • OpenShift incorporates open-source technologies alongside its native components and features.

  • The product enhances the developer experience by offering a variety of tools, multi language support, and integrated development environment (IDE) integrations.

  • The solution supports automated installation and over-the-air platform upgrades in the cloud with Amazon AWS, Google Cloud Platform, IBM Cloud, and Microsoft Azure, as well as various on-premise platforms.

  • OpenShift includes streamlined and automated container and app builds, as well as health management and scaling.

  • The solution enhances the support of smaller-footprint topologies in edge scenarios.

  • OpenShift provides easy multiple cluster management through Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes.

  • The product has enhanced security capabilities that include access controls, an enterprise registry with a built-in scanner, and networking.

  • The solution supports a wide spectrum of enterprise storage solutions for running stateful as well as stateless apps.

Reviews from Real Users

An executive head of department - M-PESA Tech at a comms service provider gives OpenShift a high rating because its automation can go a long way in reducing time to market and the time required to fix issues that arise from deployment.

Vikram C., head of infrastructure & cloud ops at a comms service provider, rates highly three qualities of OpenShift, summarizing them to mature, seamless integration, and easy setup.

OpenShift Customers

UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton

OpenShift Video

OpenShift Pricing Advice

What users are saying about OpenShift pricing:
  • "I don't deal with the cost part, but I know that the cost is very high when compared to other products. They charge for CPU and memory, but we don't worry about it."
  • "We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO."
  • "We are currently using the open version, OKD. We plan to get the enterprise version in the future."
  • "The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees."
  • "Pricing of OpenShift depends on the number of nodes and who is hosting it."
  • "The model of pricing and buying licences is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole."
  • OpenShift Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Cloud Native Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Managing infrastructure is easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling, but technical support is not up to the mark
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application."
    • "Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—the support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support... When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift."

    What is our primary use case?

    I have used OpenShift in two companies. My earlier company was using a CI/CD pipeline. I customized the CI/CD pipeline in Java and then in Jenkins. We used it to deploy applications in different stages in the CI/CD. In my current company we are using CloudBees Core. They have a CI/CD pipeline and using that we deploy with the OpenShift platform.

    If any application team wants to deploy an application on a container platform, we offer a platform for that. If they want to deploy a microservice application and they want to use a microservices architecture, we provide a space for that. OpenShift is running on the AWS platform, which means that deployment is highly scalable and highly retainable. People who want to deploy an application with a zero-downtime infrastructure prefer using the to OpenShift platform.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The solution provides a lot of flexibility to the application team for running their applications in the container platform, without needing to monitor the entire infrastructure all the time. It automatically scales and automatically self-heals. There is also a mechanism to alert the team in case it is over-committing or overutilizing the application.

    What is most valuable?

    One of the valuable features is that it's very easy to package an application and deploy it within a short period of time. Since it will be in the CI/CD pipeline, deployment is very easy. And the automation process is very easy and it's highly scalable. It can be scaled up or down at any time. We don't need a person managing the infrastructure all the time because there is automatic self-healing of the application in case something goes wrong.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been working with OpenShift for the past two years.

    Buyer's Guide
    OpenShift
    November 2022
    Learn what your peers think about OpenShift. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
    656,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability is quite strong, since it's a flavor of Kubernetes. We don't have any doubt about that aspect because we have never seen the infrastructure down for a long time, like a day.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scaling it is quite easy. We can scale to as many nodes as we want and scale down to as many nodes as we want. That is fast because we have an automated script in place to scale up and scale down the infrastructure. We are quite happy with the solution in that regard.

    How are customer service and support?

    Documentation and technical support could be improved. The product is good, but when we raise a case with support—say we are having an image issue—support is not really up to the mark. It is difficult to get support compared to other vendors. AWS will get on a call for any problem and start a screen-sharing session. They will immediately start fixing the issue, whereas with Red Hat and OpenShift, we have never seen similar support. When we raise a case, their support people will hesitate to get on a call or a screen-sharing session. That is a major drawback when it comes to OpenShift. Support-wise, they are still lacking.

    A friend called me and they are using OpenShift 4.6. They installed a Prometheus box and they upgraded OpenShift and they upgraded the registry. After upgrading, one of the nodes was not able to run the container. When they raised a case, the support guy said that they needed to maintain the old images. Why, when they upgraded the OpenShift, do they need to maintain the old images? My friend called me and told me this and that it is not mentioned in the documentation. He said he raised a case and then followed up with support for the last four days, but there has been no response. The documentation was not clear. Now, we are facing this issue and we don't know how to solve this problem.

    That was when focusing on upgrading from 4.6 to 4.7 or 4.8. It seems OpenShift never looks at how to manage earlier versions they sold in the market. Without the proper guidance or support for the product, people will not continue with the product. They need to keep that in mind. It shouldn't be that they only sell the product to the customer and ask them to run the show. They have to think of continuous support. That's why I give it six out of 10.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Before OpenShift we were only using Docker. There was no Kubernetes in our infrastructure. With Docker, there is no scalability. It is just a package. In terms of scalability and availability, Docker will fail. That is why we chose OpenShift as a platform.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is okay because there is a straightforward installation process to follow. It is guided by their people and they know how to implement things. We only faced an issue when we started running the infrastructure and that's when support was not up to the mark for OpenShift.

    Deployment is quite fast because we have a CI/CD pipeline and we use GitLab for the source code. It can be done within 30 minutes or an hour for the UAT stage. When going to production, there will be a software assessment and then the time needed depends upon change requests and the change window for the application.

    We have an implementation strategy for OpenShift. We have prepared a baseline saying that if a given application comes onboard with OpenShift, the team has to learn some basic technical stuff. They have to create a Dockerfile and create the source-to-image. Then they have to use the repository and onboard or copy their source code into it. The baseline documentation exists for people to follow. We will then deploy their application to OpenShift and there will be a dedicated team to further support the onboarding process.

    What was our ROI?

    We have seen return on investment. Applications used to run in VMware, but now they are running in OpenShift. There are benefits in terms of scalability and availability, and they can spin up more microservice applications and that is something that cannot be done in the VMware platform.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I don't deal with the cost part, but I know that the cost is very high when compared to other products. They charge for CPU and memory, but we don't worry about it. If people really want to make use of this platform, they don't care about the licensing and costs.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    My team members evaluated Amazon EKS and Pivotal Web Services. OpenShift was the market leader in terms of a container platform and that's one of the reasons we chose it for our company.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you really need an application, meaning one million customers are going to use the application, then this platform will be quite significant. If you only have 10 or 20 or 100 users of an application, OpenShift is not the right choice. The cost is quite high. For that number of people, there is no need to run in a container platform. You need a large number of concurrent users accessing an application and then OpenShift provides the scalability.

    We have not considered building our own container platform because it's very tedious to manage the infrastructure and you need a highly skilled person who knows Kubernetes very well, and OpenShift very well. We don't have that kind of team or people with the skill sets.

    When it comes to security, we have the Prisma Cloud image scanning so that each and every image is scanned and we get a report regarding the kinds of vulnerabilities there are in particular images. That way, in case there are any vulnerabilities or critical patches that need to be applied to the images, they will be taken care of before going to production. In addition, we have used SonarQube for code scanning and Prometheus for monitoring.

    On top of that, there are security properties in OpenShift as well, such as user authentication, user level, access level. But at the image level, we need specialist software to scan the images and report the vulnerabilities. If an application requires additional security in terms of images and the packages, we configure Prisma Cloud in the CI/CD pipeline, so that at each stage it will scan and evaluate the software and report the vulnerabilities to the respective teams.

    When we are developing our application to deploy into OpenShift, it can be challenging to refactor the application or redo the application. It takes some time for the team to do that kind of infrastructure stuff at the coding level.

    We don't use OpenShift's CodeReady Workspaces because that is for new infrastructure, for people who are new to the OpenShift platform. We just use Docker images and deploy the application.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    PaaS Support Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Our BUs can rapidly deploy changes to code, test them, and deploy an image in seconds, saving us time
    Pros and Cons
    • "The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that."
    • "The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications... They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our company uses it as a platform as a service. We have business units with developers who deploy their containerized applications in OpenShift. We have a team that supports the infrastructure of clusters all over the world. We run thousands of applications on it.

    It's deployed on-prem and in the cloud.

    How has it helped my organization?

    One benefit is that it provides you with the flexibility and efficiency of cloud-native stacks while enabling you to meet regulatory constraints. They have a catalog of the ratings of the base images that we use to build our containers. We reference that to show our security team that an application we're building has passed the security with vulnerabilities that are acceptable. We won't deploy it if something is not unacceptable.

    In terms of our organization, the business units are able to deploy changes to the code rapidly. They can test it on the test cluster and, once it's tested, they can deploy an image in seconds. It has saved us time. Our guys are continuing to move to the OpenShift platform from whatever they were on, whether it was a mainframe or a standalone machine. And they're doing that for the cost savings.

    In addition, a perfect example of the solution's automated processes and their effect on development time is the source-to-image feature. The developer can use that tool to improve his code's quality and it saves him some time. He doesn't have to understand the specifics of building a container.

    There is also an advantage due to the solution's CodeReady Workspaces. That definitely helps reduce project onboarding time. There are prebuilt packages that they use. We have a lot of Java and some .NET and Python and the CodeReady packages help. Conservatively, that feature has reduced onboarding time by 50 percent. It also helps reduce the time to market by about the same amount.

    Overall, Red Hat is a handy tool to have, like an electric screwdriver instead of a manual one. We don't have to write things manually. We can use what they've already written to make us more productive.

    What is most valuable?

    The developers seem to like the source-to-image feature. That makes it easy for them to deploy an application from code into containers, so they don't have to think about things. They take it straight from their code into a containerized application. If you don't have OpenShift, you have to build the container and then deploy the container to, say, EKS or something like that. It's a little different.

    In terms of the solution’s security throughout the stack and the software supply chain, it meets our needs. It's excellent as far as we're concerned. It goes right along with the Kubernetes role-based assets control. OpenShift's security features for running business-critical applications are excellent. A lot of our external-facing applications have been protected. We do use Apigee for a lot of it, but we also do security scans so we don't expose something to a known vulnerability.

    What needs improvement?

    The software-defined networking part of it caused us quite a bit of heartburn. We ran into a lot of problems with the difference between on-prem and cloud, where we had to make quite a number of modifications. That heartburn meant millions of dollars for us. That was a year ago and the product has matured since then. They've since resolved it, so it's not really an issue anymore.

    The storage part of it was also problematic. There were quite a few things that really hampered us. But it's much better now.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using OpenShift for five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's extremely stable. We haven't had any outages that were caused by the software. There have been issues due to human error on our side, such as not buying enough memory for the host. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It's also extremely scalable. On our dev cluster, we auto-scale from 50 nodes up to 130 on a weekend, when there is a need. It also scales itself down to save money over the weekend. When people start hitting it on Monday, it scales back up, seamlessly.

    In terms of users, we have about 20,000 developers, all over the world. It's used 24 hours a day. We have centralized development clusters that are being used all the time because we have deployments on every continent except Antarctica.

    We're moving off mainframes and monolithic apps into the containerized world. Increasing our usage is a stated management decision in our organization. OpenShift has been growing in our company in the last couple of years.

    How are customer service and support?

    We use the tech support daily and they're pretty good. There are always going to be a few rough spots, but most of the time they're responsive.

    You may get one support guy who doesn't understand the solution or the problem and they give a wrong solution, and we all know that it's the wrong solution. The problem is that we have people who have different first languages, so they don't always phrase the question well. I can see where a tech support guy might get a little confused because of the wording of an issue.

    Red Hat, as a partner for helping to create the platform we need, has shared code, information, and ideas. They've been very helpful and open. We have a couple of technical account managers who meet with us once a month. One is in the UK and the other is in the US. They're very responsive when it comes to any problems we run into.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Previously, all we used were standalone Unix machines. We didn't use a different container orchestration, like Mesos. We never considered building our own. We took a look at OpenShift a long time ago and it was really the best at the time.

    How was the initial setup?

    Version 3 is very complex but it's 1,000 times better than five years ago, and it's even much better than it was a year ago. The deployment was a pain point for our company, but it's irrelevant for someone buying it now. They have fixed a lot of stuff.

    We have huge deployments, hundreds of nodes in a cluster. The deployment time is relative to the size of the cluster, but the deployment time has gone from a week to a day for a 100-node cluster. Red Hat has improved the process considerably.

    What was our ROI?

    It provides us with good value.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    There weren't a whole lot of options. There was Mesos or home-grown or Kubernetes using Rancher. There wasn't anything that really compared to OpenShift at the time. OpenShift was a complete package. There were a lot of things you had to do manually with the other products. The Kubernetes world has changed a lot since then.

    The fact that Red Hat was open source was a factor and the security was what we really liked about it. They use CRI-O, which is a secure runtime container, as opposed to using Docker, which is super-insecure running as root. Red Hat is definitely the leader in the container security world.

    What other advice do I have?

    You have to understand what you're getting into and you have to be committed to upgrading it. There are some people in the world who say they'll never want to upgrade it again. With Kubernetes, if you're going to get into OpenShift, you have to "sign the bottom line," so to speak, that says, "I'm going to update it," because the Kubernetes world moves at a fast pace.

    In terms of container orchestration, we are totally OpenShift, but we use other Red Hat products like Linux and Tower. We do have standalone Linux machines that we manage, but we'll be migrating some of the applications from those standalone machines into the OpenShift container world. That's where the cost savings are.

    Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenShift
    November 2022
    Learn what your peers think about OpenShift. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
    656,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Executive Head of Department - M-PESA Tech at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Its automation can go a long way in reducing time to market and the time required to fix issues that arise from deployment
    Pros and Cons
    • "The company had a product called device financing, where the company worked as a partner with Google. It allowed customers to take mobile phones on loan or via credit. When we migrated those services to OpenShift in February last year, we were able to sell over 100,000 devices in a single day, which was very good."
    • "The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management."

    How has it helped my organization?

    Our service order management platform was cloud-native. We deployed its microservices on Red Hat OpenShift. When we did that, we were able to increase the capacity of order processing from 100,000 a day to at least 400,000 orders daily. That is the incremental capacity that OpenShift gave us.

    The company had a product called device financing, where the company worked as a partner with Google. It allowed customers to take mobile phones on loan or via credit. When we migrated those services to OpenShift in February last year, we were able to sell over 100,000 devices in a single day, which was very good.

    We deployed some microservices to handle Airtime Advance and Data Advance. This product from the consumer commercial team needed a throughput of around 2,500. They were able to get that from Red Hat OpenShift.

    What is most valuable?

    The self-healing of pods is a valuable feature. This feature goes a long way in helping us ensure our uptime for services, improving the performance of the system.

    The solution provides us with the flexibility of cloud-native stacks while enabling us to meet regulatory constraints. Since most of our services were deployed on-premises, this allowed us not to get into data privacy issues for services with personally identifiable information belonging to customers. It is microservice-ready from a cloud-native perspective, which is a benefit.

    With the automation that OpenShift gives you, you can automate as much as possible. This goes a long way in reducing time to market and errors due to human intervention. So, if an organization can do a lot of automation, e.g., automating deployments, that can go a very long way in reducing the time to market and the time required to fix issues that arise out of deployment.

    What needs improvement?

    The whole area around the hybrid cloud could be improved. I would like to deploy a Red Hat OpenShift cluster on-premise and on the cloud, then have Red Hat do the entire hybrid cloud management.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I was using this solution at my previous company. I left that company in October of last year.

    We implemented the project mid-2019. We went live just before the pandemic in 2020.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is very stable.

    From some issues in production where some nodes went down, we just needed to improve in monitoring the Red Hat cluster. Then, we could know when there was degraded performance and repair it before it could cause an impact to the customer.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It is able to scale based on load.

    How are customer service and support?

    The support is amazing. They stick to the SLA, and even go out of their way to research and assist customers to resolve issues. I would rate the support as nine out of 10.

    Red Hat is amazing. With the proper leadership in place and proper partnership, you can do a lot more with Red Hat. There is a very active community where they share codes, information, and ideas.

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Initially, we used to run Vanilla Kubernetes, which is open source. Then, we realized we were short on skill sets. Another organization had done a PoC of Red Hat OpenShift, and it passed. So, our organization was gracious enough to allow us to spend money on Red Hat OpenShift licenses. That was in 2019.

    With Vanilla Kubernetes, we were not able to successfully implement service mesh. That comes already preconfigured for you with Red Hat OpenShift. 

    In terms of traffic routing and firewall management, it was a nightmare managing that in Vanilla Kubernetes. However, with Red Hat OpenShift, you only add specific IPs in firewalls, as opposed to the nightmare that we used to see with Vanilla Kubernetes.

    Red Hat's commitment to open source is one of the reasons that we went with it. We knew that we would get continuous updates. Also, the option of keeping our OpenShift cluster up-to-date with new services was a headache that we passed onto Red Hat. 

    How was the initial setup?

    Initially, the deployment process was complex. However, with repeated use, it made more sense. Deploying TIBCO BusinessWorks Container Edition and optimizing it on Red Hat OpenShift is complex.

    What about the implementation team?

    We teamed up with Red Hat's OEM to do the Red Hat OpenShift implementation. So, it was a small team. We just did a waterfall implementation, not agile.

    What was our ROI?

    We did see ROI.

    The solution's CodeReady Workspaces reduced project onboarding time by over 50% and time to market by 70%.

    The organization really wanted to go open source for a very long time to reduce its CapEx and OpEx costs.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO.

    The pricing and licensing for OpenShift is okay.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    At the time of our evaluation, our options were only OpenShift and Vanilla Kubernetes. Now, there is also VMware Tanzu, which wasn't as mature a product when we did the PoC in 2019.

    I am currently implementing VMware Tanzu in my new role at another company. I have not seen any significant differences between Tanzu and OpenShift.

    What other advice do I have?

    Go for this solution.

    Red Hat does a good job of ensuring that their solutions are operable and you can take advantage of the features within a solution.

    We also had Red Hat Ansible for automating server provisioning and some operational tasks.

    We didn't get any security breaches from Red Hat OpenShift.

    I would rate OpenShift as eight out of 10.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Vikram Casula - PeerSpot reviewer
    Head Of Infrastructure & Cloud ops at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5
    Mature, seamless integration, and easy setup
    Pros and Cons
    • "Its interface is good. The other part is the seamless integration with the stack that I have. Because my stack is mostly of Red Hat, which is running on top of VMware virtualization, I have had no issues with integrating both of these and trying to install them. We had a seamless integration with the other non-Red Hat products as well."
    • "One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift."

    What is our primary use case?

    These are for some of our applications where we wanted high resiliency. In the traditional VM environment, what used to happen is that everything was dependent on the infrastructure. We wanted to move away from that particular concept. Once an application becomes stateless, it should not be dependent upon platform-related things. We wanted it to be more robust and perform at a much better efficiency. We also wanted higher availability.

    We are getting everything from OpenShift at this point in time. What we're doing here is pretty much basic. Any of Kubernetes could have done it because all we're looking for is being able to manage the complete cluster.

    What is most valuable?

    Its interface is good. The other part is the seamless integration with the stack that I have. Because my stack is mostly of Red Hat, which is running on top of VMware virtualization, I have had no issues with integrating both of these and trying to install them. We had a seamless integration with the other non-Red Hat products as well.

    What needs improvement?

    One of the features that I've observed in Tanzu Mission Control is that I can manage multiple Kubernetes environments. For instance, one of my lines of business is using OpenShift OKD; another one wants to use Google Anthos, and somebody else wants to use VMware Tanzu. If I have to manage all these, Tanzu Mission Control is giving me the opportunity to completely manage all of my Kubernetes clusters, whereas, with OpenShift, I can only manage a particular area. I can't manage other Kubernetes clusters. I would like to have the option to manage all Kubernetes clusters with OpenShift.

    I would like to have self-service capability. A lot of developers want to become independent today, and they don't want to depend on the Infra teams for managing, provisioning, etc. If we can give a self-service capability, in terms of building a particular Kubernetes cluster end-to-end, to developers, that would be a plus. That's the ask of the hour.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using this solution for the past one and a half years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is a perfectly stable product. If an application is ready to be containerized, it is seamless. You will not have any hiccups.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Scaling up and down is happening, but my concern is that if we hit any kind of bugs, the open-source community won't be that active in terms of doing the bug fixes. If I get any bug, there might be a delay in getting the bug release or the patch coming up. When I'm hosting an enterprise data application on an open-source product, I will have a little higher risk of non-availability, and that might lead to revenue impact as well. Keeping that in mind, I would like to go for the enterprise edition, at least for my high revenue-generating applications.

    In terms of the number of people working with this solution, I have about eight administrators. I have eight people in my team who manage the complete Kubernetes cluster for me, which is a combination of OKD and Tanzu. It is being used on a daily basis.

    How are customer service and support?

    We are using the open-source version, and their community support is good. I don't expect a rapid response from the community, but if I post today, I usually get a response in a few hours. 

    We have an enterprise agreement with Red Hat for the other products that we are using. Their response is very prompt.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We also use Tanzu, which has more limitations. If I have to use an F5 load balancer or other third-party products, Tanzu shrinks a little bit. It is not as mature as Red Hat OpenShift, which is more open to other products. I have an F5 load balancer, and I struggle a bit to integrate the F5 load balancer with Tanzu, whereas with OpenShift, it happens directly. For Tanzu, I have to have another layer on my load balancer, which is Avi. I have to use their services. Adding one more product into the environment brings some complexity, whereas OpenShift is very agile in nature. It adapts to all kinds of products that are not part of the same stack. So, I had no issues with that. I would rate OpenShift higher than Tanzu because OpenShift is a much more mature product.

    How was the initial setup?

    It was straightforward. I had a perfect team with prior experience in OpenShift. They were able to do it without any hiccups. The community of OpenShift is very good. There are a lot of exchanges happening in the community space, which helped us in doing it in a seamless way. I would rate it a 5 out of 5 in terms of the ease of the setup.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    We are currently using the open version, OKD. We plan to get the enterprise version in the future.

    What other advice do I have?

    It is an excellent product. There are a lot of items that will be good to have in there, but based on the comparison with others and based on the kind of use cases I have seen, I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    VP at United Overseas Bank Limited (UOB)
    Real User
    Top 20
    Has a good design, and can reduce the cost of having multiple applications, but has some bugs that still need fixing, cluster upgrades can be challenging, and has bad technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud. I also find the design of OpenShift good."
    • "My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs. Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime. Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud. I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our use cases for OpenShift are for payments and internal bank transactions.

    What is most valuable?

    What I like best about OpenShift is that it can reduce some of the costs of having multiple applications because you can just move them into small container applications. For example, applications don't need to run for twenty days, only to be used up by Monday. Through OpenShift, you can move some of the small applications into any cloud.

    I also find the design of OpenShift good.

    What needs improvement?

    My team has found some bugs in OpenShift due to continuous integration, and this is an area for improvement in the platform. RedHat should fix the bugs.

    Another area for improvement in OpenShift is that upgrading clusters can be challenging, resulting in downtime.

    Application support also needs improvement in OpenShift because the platform doesn't support all applications in the cloud.

    I'd like upgraded storage in the next release of OpenShift, especially when I need to do a DR exercise. It would also be good if the platform allows mirroring with another cluster, or more portability in terms of moving applications to another cluster.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We're using OpenShift for the last two years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    OpenShift is a good solution, stability-wise.

    The performance of OpenShift is good, but sometimes, it can be bad, depending on the network, but that's okay. That's normal. You won't have a very bad experience with OpenShift, performance-wise. You'll experience some issues from it, but it's still a good platform.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    As OpenShift is on-premise, there's not much scalability from it. My team is still coming up with new clusters, and some clusters have been deployed as well, but my company isn't ready to scale OpenShift at the moment.

    How are customer service and support?

    My team contacts OpenShift support whenever there's an issue, and it was a very bad experience. The response time needs improvement, and support didn't give straightforward answers.

    On a scale of one to five, my rating for OpenShift support is a two.

    How was the initial setup?

    The setup for OpenShift was complex, and it can only be done by a consultant. My team can do an on-premise setup and automation, but a consultant has to certify the cluster, otherwise, you can't get support from RedHat.

    Deployment for OpenShift can be completed within six to seven hours depending on the infrastructure. Otherwise, it could take more than one day.

    My rating for the initial setup of OpenShift is three out of five. RedHat will check the setup or configuration, and if the customer is ready to take over the process, then it's good, but what's usually happening is that the vendor isn't providing detailed guidelines, so my rating is more on the neutral side.

    What about the implementation team?

    We used a RedHat consultant for the deployment of OpenShift.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The licensing cost for OpenShift is expensive when compared to other products. RedHat also charges you additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We're currently evaluating a product from IBM.

    What other advice do I have?

    My company uses OpenShift currently, but it's still under RFP.

    OpenShift is deployed on-premises on a disconnected cluster for a financial institution.

    Some maintenance is required for OpenShift. Whenever there's a bug, my team does the maintenance, but there's still a need to check with RedHat support on how to fix the bug. My team can't do the maintenance without support from RedHat developers.

    Less than ten people use OpenShift within the company.

    I would recommend OpenShift to others because it's a good tool for the financial sector versus public clouds such as AWS and Azure. I'd also advice others that if it's a public cloud, it's easy to manage, but if it's on-premise, then it can't be managed.

    My rating for OpenShift is seven out of ten.

    My company is a customer of OpenShift.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    EdisonMacabebe - PeerSpot reviewer
    Software Engineer at Section6
    Real User
    Top 10
    The solution is easily compatible with other solutions and the features are easily installed
    Pros and Cons
    • "The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access."
    • "OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets."

    What is our primary use case?

    OpenShift as a solution is quite broad depending on the industry you are applying it to. For example, telco companies use the entire breadth of applications that the client wants from the web to their middle tier up to the back end. 

    OpenShift is a platform for ensuring that your apps are running reliably. 

    What is most valuable?

    OpenShift has 100% compatibility with Kubernetes. I find using kubectl, and kubectl commands to be valuable.

    The security features of OpenShift are strong when in use of role-based access. The solution is easily compatible with other solutions and the features are easily installed.

    What needs improvement?

    OpenShift could be improved if it were more accessible for smaller budgets. I currently mostly use Raspberry Pi, which will be over to use Kubernetes. As a platform, I am using Raspberry Pi rather than using a very large configuration computer. 

    The solution requires eight or more cores of CPUs, multiplied over the number of nodes needed to make OpenShift reliable, making it susceptible to failures.

    In the future, I would like to see a roadmap to have Wasm supported. If you have WebAssembly as an alternative to Docker, it would be great.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been learning how to use OpenShift for years, but actively using it for six months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is stable. We haven't experienced downtime. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    OpenShift is easy to scale. You just need to make sure you have the capacity to purchase and the number of nodes needed. Scalability only depends on your budget.

    Currently, they are more than 10 users of OpenShift in the organization.

    How are customer service and support?

    Technical support has been efficient, supportive, and communicative. They do not drop the ball. I would rate the customer service and support of OpenShift a five out of five. 

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Previously, I had experience with VMware's Kubernetes version. VMware was very difficult to install. I could not understand the route they were taking and why there were so many steps. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup of OpenShift is straightforward if you are an experienced platform engineer. Installing on AWS or Azure could be more complex. The product has a Terraform command to install everything.

    If all of the tools that are needed and all the hardware is there, the implementation should be straightforward. I would rate the initial setup a four out of five overall.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Pricing of OpenShift depends on the number of nodes and who is hosting it. OpenShift is more expensive than other solutions, however, I think it is worth it.

    What other advice do I have?

    Anyone looking to implement OpenShift in their organization should start with the most minimal setup for configuration. There is an OpenShift version with just the single master with a built-in worker. You will only need a single CPU and you can start with at least three masters and a single worker and scale from there as the need arises, whether it is to add additional worker nodes or as your app grows.

    There is no product that compares to OpenShift. I would rate it a 10 out of 10 overall.

    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?

    Microsoft Azure
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Assistant to Vice President at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Good support, scalable, and helpful support
    Pros and Cons
    • "The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration."
    • "OpenShift could improve by providing the ability to integrate with public cloud platforms. This way we can easily use the services that these platforms offer. For instance, Amazon AWS. However, all the three major hyper-scalers solutions offer excellent DevOps and CI/CD tooling. If there was an easy way to integrate with them it would be beneficial. We need a way to easily integrate with the monitoring and dashboard services that they provide."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use OpenShift mainly for building middleware services and web applications. All the applications we have transformed on the microservices architecture have been deployed on OpenShift.

    What needs improvement?

    OpenShift could improve by providing the ability to integrate with public cloud platforms. This way we can easily use the services that these platforms offer. For instance, Amazon AWS. However, all the three major hyper-scalers solutions offer excellent DevOps and CI/CD tooling. If there was an easy way to integrate with them it would be beneficial. We need a way to easily integrate with the monitoring and dashboard services that they provide. 

    Making use of features, such as serverless technology we easily integrate these services with OpenShift. It would be a win-win, because then you can choose the best of all the worlds, and then build your solution.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have used OpenShift within the last 12 months.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    OpenShift is a stable solution.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The scalability of OpenShift combined with Kubernetes is good. At least from the software standpoint, it becomes quite easy to handle the scalability through configuration. You need to constantly monitor the underlying infrastructure and ensure that it has adequate provisioning. If you have enough infrastructure, then managing the scalability is quite easy which is done through configuration.

    We have approximately thousands of users using the solution. The business applications that we build, our customers use them regularly, this includes the banking and insurance applications.

    How are customer service and support?

    All the platforms that we have, whether it is Pivotal, VMware, Red Hat, Microsoft, or Amazon, are partners or we have an alliance with them. We regularly speak to them and we discuss with them the challenges we face. We have a good relationship with the support.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup on the OpenShift platform took us a long time to complete for the whole department. It took approximately one and a half months to set it up properly. 

    Once the implementation was complete we started looking at how we can achieve reusable scripts for the developers. In a way that they can create the scripts in a quick fashion, instead of them doing the configuration and deployment themselves. It takes time for the implementation, and then it's complex overall too. Once you learn it, then it's quite easy.

    What about the implementation team?

    The team we have is small for maintenance and support. We have approximately six people managing the whole platform for the entire department. Earlier on, there were more, but the platform has matured, and then the number of applications the platform used to run is going down because they're being moved to Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS. We keep the team approximately four people who will manage the platform for the next couple of years for the whole department. After that, everything will be on either Microsoft Azure or Amazon AWS.

    What other advice do I have?

    We are in the phase of moving out of OpenShifh to cloud-native services of Microsoft Azure or Amazon AWS.

    If anybody is looking for a solution that can work on-premise as well as on the cloud and gives the flexibility of not tying the solution to the underlying platform, then OpenShift is one of the popular choices you can make.

    I rate OpenShift an eight out of ten.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
    PeerSpot user
    Tech Lead at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Kubernetes container platform that provides flexibility for peak seasons and has great customer support
    Pros and Cons
    • "This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems."
    • "The latest 4.0 version of OpenShift disabled a few of the features we previously made use of, although this wasn't a huge deal."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use this solution to support our clients and specifically for package delivery and the ordering of individual items. 

    We are evaluating a few others products that are complementary to OpenShift including Advanced Cluster Management, Advanced Cluster Security, and Depth spaces. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    This solution helps us to account for peak seasons involving higher demand than usual. It also gives us confidence in the security of our overall systems. 

    OpenShift allows us to take advantage of the cloud in terms of sizing, especially during times when the prediction of volumes is difficult. 

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature of this solution is its scalability and maturity. It is also easy to start to use and offers good customer support. The Red Hat team assists us whenever we have questions. 

    What needs improvement?

    The latest 4.0 version of OpenShift disabled a few of the features we previously made use of, although this wasn't a huge deal. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been using this solution since 2017. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This solution offers excellent stability and we have not experienced any issues.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This is a scalable solution. 

    How are customer service and support?

    I would rate this solution a ten out of ten for support. Their customer support is outstanding and we always get the answers we need very quickly. Their technological know-how is good and we are able to get assistance from one architect without getting passed on. 

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Positive

    How was the initial setup?

    Setting up OpenShift 4.0 is simple. It takes between 45 minutes and one hour. 

    What was our ROI?

    We have seen a return on our investment. We received payback for our projects in one and a half years which has been advantageous for us.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The model of pricing and buying licenses is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on-demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We evaluated other solutions including Rancher. OpenShift is built with the developer in mind which is advantageous versus most other products on the market. We also chose OpenShift due to the peace of mind of knowing it is a solution supported by Red Hat. It is also an easy-to-use solution for our developers and has a great administrative interface.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would rate this solution a ten 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?

    Amazon Web Services (AWS)
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free OpenShift Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: November 2022
    Product Categories
    PaaS Clouds
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free OpenShift Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.