Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling Reviews

The product helps our organization minimize costs by providing high availability of applications and microservice.

The product's most valuable features are high availability and persistence.

The product should improve vertical scaling features. It should support scaling inside the nodes. It requires the capacity to scale microservices in other nodes.

We have been using Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling for seven years.

I rate the platform's stability an eight or nine out of ten.

Compared to the product, Karpenter has a high algorithm to manage horizontal and vertical scaling. I rate its scalability a six out of ten. 

We used OpenShift earlier. We switched to Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling for better infrastructure performance.

The initial setup process is easy. It involves configuring a cluster, creating a cluster request, and using code to deploy it. The deployment time depends on specific applications and infrastructure. It takes approximately three days to complete and needs one person to execute maintenance and patching.

Sometimes, we take the help of an integrator, whereas sometimes, we refer to the documentation for the product implementation.

The product's pricing depends on the traffic and workload. Additional costs exist if you use services like CloudWatch, VPN, etc.

The product is easy to use and configure for small nodes. For large nodes, I advise others to use other solutions like Karpenter.

I rate Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling an eight out of ten.

The tool serves several purposes. It helps to pass instances automatically. We can perform maintenance on instances and application upgrades.

The solution incorporates ease of maintenance and reduction in operational overhead and costs. Patching is also easy. 

The most valuable feature is the tool's ability to integrate with load balancers. 

The launch configuration feature doesn't work properly. It needs to improve the load configuration feature along with launch templates. The tool needs to tag feature as well. 

I have been working with the solution since 2016. 

I rate Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight-point five out of ten. 

I rate Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling's pricing a seven out of ten. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

I use the product for its availability and scalability features.

The solution is highly scalable. If one of the instances has some issue and the server is terminated, or if the production is running on a server and it gets shut down, we would not have any backup plan. We will have to recreate another server and run production. The product helps us by creating another server automatically within a minimum amount of time. This process decreases the impact on production and downtime. The product fulfills all my requirements.

The existing instance should not be terminated during scale in and scale out. The product does not explain why a particular instance is terminated. There is no option to check the log either.

I have been using the solution for two years.

We have not found any bug in the solution in the last two years.

The product is stable. Around 100 people use the product in our organization.

We can easily deploy the product if we have the documentation. The document is good enough.

The product is cheap.

The solution is cloud-based. If one of our CPUs or memory has an issue or is being utilized more than usual, another instance scales up automatically. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is a function inside Amazon EC2.

We are using it to scale the capacity of our internet services. It automatically increases capacity when usage surpasses certain thresholds to prevent any issues with capacity.

The solution has greatly reduced our workload. Specifically, it allows us to automate the monitoring of sites, even when we don't have staff available to do it.

The auto-scaling feature is particularly useful. Additionally, CloudWatch and CloudTrail are also important features for us.

As we are transitioning to managing containerized applications, the solution could improve by adding more managed container services as a feature in the solution.

I have been using Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling for approximately eight years.

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is highly reliable.

I rate the stability of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a ten out of ten.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 20 users using the solution. We plan to increase our usage as we progress.

I rate the scalability of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a ten out of ten.

We have a very close connection with Amazon. We have all representatives from Amazon contacting us, approximately monthly. We have a channel where we can get in touch with them through instant messaging. 

I rate support from Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a nine out of ten.

Positive

I use Microsoft Azure prior and Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling. They both operate very similarly. We have a multi-cloud environment and we use both solutions.

The initial setup of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is straightforward.

The deployment process is simple and straightforward. It mainly involved configuring the settings on the console. We only need to log in, modified the necessary settings, saved it, and that is it. There were no specific actions required for deployment.

I rate the initial setup of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a ten out of ten.

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

We monitor the spending from dashboards on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. We have various kinds of dashboards and we have seen a return on investment.

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling uses a pay-as-you-go pricing model. 

I rate the price of Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a nine out of ten.

I advise others to establish a baseline measurement of usage and determine the necessary threshold parameters for cost and computing power before implementation. It is a relatively effective and simple way to expand capacity.

I rate Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling a ten out of ten.

The client had a requirement to make sure there was a specific amount of memory utilization for each of the EC2 instances. When it reached its maximum or a threshold limit. The client wanted the Auto Scaling to scale up more easily to instances onto the system, with all the relevant security configurations, and everything available. That was his business problem. He didn't want to pay a lot at once, however, he didn't want to leave the system in a state that should not be in a position to be unable to handle jobs due to heavy usage or if there is a demand. The client wanted to make sure the demand was met and he wanted to make sure the service that he was obtaining from AWS was not idle.

Therefore, we provided the Auto Scaling EC2s. While we designed the solution, we identified what could be the minimum utilization based on the on-prem solution that they had. It was kind of a migration solution. The client had an on-prem environment and wanted to go into AWS in a cost-effective way. To ensure cost-effectiveness, we proposed Auto Scaling, so that if there was a heavy demand for memory, Auto Scaling could start scaling up based on the demand. And then, when the demand is reduced, it would automatically scale down and run on a specific minimum usage so that the cost will be at the minimum. 

When customers decide to go from on-prem to cloud, they have a lot of issues. For example, once they're comfortable on-prem, they don't want to spend a lot of operational expenses. Amazon services, however, are OpEx; it's operational costs only that you have to pay. Therefore, there is a lot of resistance that could come from the client. However, with Auto Scaling, since it guarantees that you will not be charged for what you are not using, the customer is very happy. That enables people to move into the cloud with relative comfort. 

The cloud migration is very easy and problem-free. It's not so complex. We didn't face any issues migrating. It was very fast. 

The initial setup itself was very straightforward. 

Technical support is responsive.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good. 

The integration capabilities are good. 

We have found the solution offers good security capabilities. 

We do have some issues sometimes when something is not configured in the correct way. However, users can avoid this type of trouble by being knowledgeable about the product.

The price could always be a bit better. 

On the ECs, the T2 microservice is the lowest tier. That particular tier could be a little better than what they're offering currently. You cannot do anything at all on that T2 micro. It's a useless tier to have introduced, as you can't do anything at all. You would be able to log in and log off and do some simple features which are already available on that operating system. Yet you cannot install anything. You cannot do anything at all. 

I've used the solution for six months or so. 

The product is very, very, very stable, even though some instances crashed due to instability here and there. Since it's Auto Scaling, there was another instance that would come up quickly. Overall, however, it was reliable. 

The solution is very scalable.

Currently, I've worked with two clients that have used the solution. 

Technical support is good. They are quite responsive. 

Positive

It was a straightforward setup, however, there were additional test scenarios we had to do, as we had to prove that services will not degrade during the time the systems are scaling up and scaling down. Those kinds of test scenarios took us little time for us to prove it meets their requirements. Apart from that, it was very easy and straightforward. 

The deployment doesn't take long, although there were some idle times. If I cut out all the idle time, we completed that project within two weeks. 

The deployment could be handled by one person. We have two staff that are not full-time handling it. We wanted some redundancy, which is why we have two, however, you only need one. 

There are no licensing costs. However, there is a monthly service charge.

We are a system integrator. I was more of a DevOps engineer on that. In the company that I'm working with, we provide the required staff augmentation to get that solution up and running.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for two instances for the frontend and backend, then I use CI/CD pipelines to integrate both, and finally, I use Jenkins.

Most of what I've deployed are CI/CD pipelines. AWS is scalable. You can always increase or adjust the resources to meet the specific requirements. I also like choosing an instance in any location, preferably the closest one. We don't have any AWS locations in South Africa, but the latency is about the same as hosting in Europe.

There should be an AWS instance in South Africa, where the latency would be even lower. It might happen soon since AWS has recently opened more data centres in Nigeria. AWS may extend its reach to South Africa, and offer hosted CLI servers there. Most of the problems with AWS are not to do with the solution itself but with configuration. It is something on design, more or less.

I have been using Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling for two years. It is a cloud-based solution.

Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling is stable. We have not experienced any downtime in the past two years.

The solution’s scalability is good. It is pretty straightforward and not in production yet.

The initial setup is straightforward. There is an interface that makes it easy to select what you need, and billing is also quite straightforward.

The front end of the instances takes a couple of minutes.

I set up the solution, but for the database in Postgres, I need to contact a call centre. I need to PRT five times to integrate the front and back end. I also need to work with the consultant.

I first automatically provisioned the required services and configurations. I created an AWS account. I then checked the gigabyte-based deals, reviewed the instance instructions, and added the appropriate insights. This was a good first-time experience, and setting up each instance and naming them was pretty straightforward.

AWS offered some credits, so we have been able to enjoy some of those benefits. The pricing was fair.

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

I use the solution in my personal time. I like to play with it and learn a bit of software.

The solution is very easy to use, and its APIs are also very good.

The product's great, but the pricing could be improved.

I've been working with Amazon EC2 Auto Scaling for a few years.

I rate EC2's stability a ten out of ten.

The workspace is something EC2 has embedded, so it's quite good. They have different options to work with it. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. I'm the only one using the solution.`

EC2 takes a few minutes to deploy. We have more than one option while deploying the solution. We can use the GUI or the command line, making it possible to use the solution's APIs.

The solution can be implemented in-house with the proper knowledge.

You need some contracts to get support for EC2.

EC2 is a good place to start if you have some good ideas for a business because you can avoid upfront expenses. I believe you can do the same things with Amazon as with Google, Microsoft, or many other companies.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten because you must still learn how to use it first.

We use the solution to autoscale the number of servers per specific business requirements.

The solution allows setting the number of servers required depending on the usage. Later, it automatically increases or decreases the servers per the threshold level.

There should be fewer inputs required that include mandatory details for configuration. It will help someone with less technical knowledge easily set up the system.

I have been using the solution for more than seven years.

The solution is stable. I rate its stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

The solution has generated over 50-55% ROI for us. It is higher compared to GCP.

The solution is less expensive than Azure and GCP.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use EC2 as a disaster-recovery target and also to host a web server. We've got a demo account that uses AT&T Azure managed services where customers can log into our software. 

I like the fact that you don't need to pay for it when you aren't using it, especially in a disaster recovery scenario. The pricing is transparent, so you know what you're going to pay for it. 

If your EC2 instance doesn't boot up, you're in the dark about what's happening. It would be amazing if you could get a view of the console to see the status. There's something called the AWS Console, which is a web portal. I would like to see a virtual screen of an instance that hasn't started properly, so I can see where it crashed. 

I have used EC2 Auto-Scaling for eight years.

EC2 is stable.

EC2 is scalable.

It has gotten much easier to launch an EC2 instance over the years. It's straightforward. We can sign up for EC2 and other web services in a few minutes. Maintenance is something that only comes into play during a disaster recovery scenario. 

I rate Amazon EC2 Auto-Scaling nine out of 10. I recommend setting up billing alarms and paying attention to them. With a cloud platform, it's possible to get a surprise bill if you do something that is running up charges when you aren't aware. 

We use EC2 for regular usage based on on-demand pricing or cost-saving plans and Reserved Instances, depending on the customer's needs.

If customers want to use an instance for a longer time and maximize usage, we recommend savings plans and Reserved Instances instead of on-demand pricing.

We use Auto Scaling based on the customer's use case. For example, one of my customers utilizes EC2 with custom scaling configurations.

It depends on the specific case or business scenario. Sometimes, Auto Scaling is more beneficial, and sometimes, Reserved Instances are preferred, especially for longer-term usage. It varies based on the use case.

It should be more stable, more secure, and have better pricing.

I'm on the leadership side, so I don't directly work with EC2 instances. However, we sell service to the customers.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. There are numerous customers, or more than a hundred customers, using this solution.

Customer service depends on the support model and the type of support you have chosen.

The initial setup was easy and took only a couple of minutes. It's just a few clicks.

The licensing cost is expensive.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.