The use cases for the product involve provisioning of infrastructure and auto provisioning of infrastructure.
I have managed on-premise deployments in my use case with a Helm chart.
The use cases for the product involve provisioning of infrastructure and auto provisioning of infrastructure.
I have managed on-premise deployments in my use case with a Helm chart.
The biggest advantages of Amazon EKS include load balancing, auto scalability, and platform integration.
The solution includes automated node provisioning features.
The integration with AWS services involves platform services only.
We usually get deployed and only need to tweak the source code; however, I think the monitoring part and observability part could be improved.
I have been selling it for almost two years.
The scalability of Amazon EKS deserves a perfect rating of ten.
The technical support from Amazon deserves a rating of ten.
Positive
I would rate the ease of installing Amazon EKS in the middle area, giving it a five.
I have moved to pre-sales activity now.
I am selling Kubernetes Engine from Amazon.
I can rate Amazon EKS as nine because I just need to see some improvement.
I want to be a reference for Amazon.
The overall rating for Amazon EKS is 9 out of 10.
I use Amazon EKS mainly for deploying my application onto the Kubernetes infrastructure, which is provided by the underlying Amazon infrastructure.
I have many services, many applications, and many web services and web applications which are deployed using Amazon EKS across different regions in Amazon web service locations and data centers.
Other than deploying applications onto Kubernetes infrastructure using Amazon EKS, I don't have any other use cases for this tool in my current organization.
Amazon EKS has very good scalability with 100% uptime and zero latency.
Amazon EKS is the most cost-effective solution that I am using currently. If I want to reduce my downtime, I can deploy it in a multiple region architecture, which can reduce the downtime.
It is a cloud-based solution which is managed by Amazon, a global cloud services provider. I have observed very negligible issues while running my applications on Amazon EKS.
It is very pocket-friendly, cost-effective, and the setup is very simple.
If you are running a few applications that require high scalability, you can go for Amazon EKS. It is a very good tool if you want a managed Kubernetes service. It will definitely work wonders for your project.
Currently I work for a financial global giant where a millisecond latency costs around a million dollars. With Amazon EKS, I have a lot of benefits.
The only thing I feel is keeping Amazon EKS updated with the current trends and requirements of the global giants which are using this tool.
I have been using Amazon EKS for the past three years. It is very brilliant.
I have worked on several improvements, particularly regarding instances when Amazon goes down, which is the only time I see issues in Amazon EKS.
It is pretty good and pretty stable.
I have not experienced any scalability issues.
I have not had any issues with customer service.
Negative
I have not used any previous solutions.
I don't have any alternate solutions.
It is already a great tool. It is already a very good tool in the market. I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.
I mainly use the service for competition purposes, specifically for a specific competition.
The tools we are trying to see align with R&D's use cases, and then we are going to integrate them.
It provides benefits in terms of operational efficiency.
I consider Amazon EKS to be cost-effective.
The way we are using Amazon EKS is quite good, and it is fulfilling all the purposes we wanted to use it for until now. All the tools we are using in this project are AWS tools, and we are fully satisfied.
Nothing comes to my mind right now that could be improved in Amazon EKS, and I am not facing any issues.
I joined this project later, but I have been working with AWS for more than one and a half years now.
I have not contacted AWS technical support in this project, but in previous projects, we contacted them twice regarding database and other issues. They are quite good, and because it is a build project, we received immediate support within twenty-four hours. During the call, issues were solved immediately.
Positive
I have not worked with that tool currently or previously in Germany as we were not using it at that moment.
I am currently conducting POCs.
I have about four to five AI tools, with around one month of experience so far.
This is a new initiative that has not happened before.
I do not have hands-on experiences, and I have not tried Google Gemini yet. It is just a new feature we are trying to implement with AI.
With the POC, we are trying to figure out all those things, as it has already been done as part of POC, so I do not anticipate any issues later on.
On a scale of 1-10, I rate Amazon EKS a 10.
I use this to develop my products. I use it internally in my company and in the other projects I have been working on for the deployment and managing the services which I'm deploying into the Amazon EKS infrastructure. I have not actually been involved with automated patching, as my role has predominantly been as a developer setting up how we deploy our applications into Kubernetes. That's primarily where I've gained experience, not on the server management side where the patching is done, so I'm not sure how the patching works or what benefits it could offer in that context. However, I can discuss how I manage my CI/CD pipelines, application deployment, and how I use Amazon EKS for deployment. That is the part I have experience with.
I have been using Amazon EKS, and I started with ECS first, which is the Elastic Container Service where I can deploy my workloads. ECS is also one of other managed services from AWS, but it is not supporting Kubernetes. We wanted a platform where we could have an orchestration platform for Kubernetes. Hosting our own Kubernetes server is a very tedious job. Kubernetes itself is a very complex tool to manage and requires a lot of resources and knowledge to build a working solution. That's where Amazon EKS comes into the picture as a managed service built on top of a Kubernetes engine, offering many tools, such as CLI integrated tools or through their console to quickly set up a Kubernetes cluster, which otherwise is a tedious job.
With that offering, it is very easy to set up the Kubernetes cluster in Amazon EKS, and it is very easy to manage the nodes we have there, such as what instances we need. Since it's an AWS offering, we select a variety of EC2 instances available, and it integrates with it nicely. The same applies to the infrastructure as a service tool, IaaS, such as Terraform. It is very easy to create and manage Amazon EKS clusters through Terraform. Overall, it offers a lot of tooling and saves a lot of time compared to setting up and managing a Kubernetes server ourselves.
A specific feature of Amazon EKS is that Kubernetes is open source, and all its capabilities are based on that. The main advantage is launching and managing a Kubernetes server becomes very easy, as I receive out-of-the-box support for other AWS service integrations with Amazon EKS. For example, services such as AWS IAM directly integrate whenever I want to set up access control or security measures on my Kubernetes server. EC2 offers out-of-the-box support when setting up Kubernetes nodes. All this setup we need to do otherwise becomes much easier with Amazon EKS.
Regarding measuring the impact of Amazon EKS on my organization's ability to manage complex workflows effectively, there are measurable metrics we use. Whenever we set up any project, it is crucial to ensure we understand the availability and scalability of our applications. When I set up any application, I look at how we will be able to scale whenever there is a requirement for higher loads. To measure the Amazon EKS platform's effectiveness in this regard, I evaluate the different methods available for scaling the application. For instance, based on CPU and memory consumption, I can scale or use scalability tools such as KEDA. KEDA helps us scale based on various factors, such as the number of requests my application receives or the load on my service based on metrics. These tools can be easily installed on my Amazon EKS server without restrictions. Availability is crucial when setting up a Kubernetes cluster, especially when designing for a global audience using Amazon AWS. The options to configure multi-region and multi-AZ setups are incredibly valuable, as these features ensure high availability without complex traditional setups required for on-premise hosting.
One area I observed during setup was that while managing it through CLI and Terraform, there are many possibilities for setup and infrastructure updates. However, I believe the console experience could improve. In the AWS console, when trying to set up an Amazon EKS cluster, there were limitations on certain features I encountered a few months back while checking. EKS frequently updates, so I don't know if there's a new release. However, I found some features that I could not manage through the console, requiring me to use CLI or Terraform. It would be beneficial if we could have all features supported through the console, providing full management capabilities there.
I have been working with this tool for around two years now.
My current organization has not been using self-healing nodes, but I have used it in some earlier projects and organizations I worked with. When we decided to move away from containerization services such as ECS, we wanted a better orchestration platform that could easily handle those requirements. Kubernetes comes with many features for scalability, which otherwise we would have to manage ourselves with scripts. While Kubernetes is a good choice, it comes with its own learning curve, and understanding all the details is a big task. Services such as Amazon EKS, or maybe GKE for Google, provide the confidence that we will benefit from the orchestration framework that Kubernetes offers while also setting it up and managing it easily. We gain all the advantages that Kubernetes has as an engine without having to invest a great deal of time learning and configuring everything thanks to managed services such as Amazon EKS.
Regarding technical support, I recall one instance with Amazon EKS. I faced an issue with configuring pods in EKS that required access to other AWS services, such as IAM roles or S3 buckets. The setup was through OIDC providers in EKS, which set up trust relationships with IAM roles. There was a problem with OIDC provider setup a few years back when EKS was newer. I reached out, and I received good support when I submitted a ticket for the issues with the OIDC provider. They helped resolve the issues related to the trust relationship, identifying mistakes that needed fixing.
Positive
In my current company, I don't use it, but in my earlier company, we started with ECS, another AWS offering where we deployed our containers. However, as our deployment expanded, the limitations in scalability prompted us to explore better options. We began to reach a point where more than 30 or 40 instances of our services were running, and there was a need to support these across different regions. ECS offered some level of scalability, but it was not as customizable as Kubernetes, so we decided to transition from ECS to Amazon EKS to harness its full capabilities.
Using Amazon EKS as a cluster is free. The pricing only applies when I add the instances and set up nodes. For instance, when I add memory-optimized nodes, the applicable AWS pricing for those instances comes into play. Essentially, the pricing revolves around the nodes added, not the other configurations I'm attempting to set up.
Regarding the pricing of nodes, I find that it generally offers good value. I'm not certain what the comparative costs look against other platforms, such as OCI from Oracle that is known to offer lower pricing, but it ultimately depends. For example, AWS has recently introduced Graviton-based servers, which claim to be cost-saving, although I haven't used them myself. AWS provides several options, allowing me to choose configurations that suit my needs regarding CPU and memory. While I don't have firm details about enterprise pricing options or upfront reservations that may provide discounts, what I appreciate is the flexibility in selecting from various instance categories to meet specific requirements.
Based on my experience with Amazon EKS support, I would rate it a nine out of ten overall.
Our primary use case is related to our ecommerce solution, which is very high in terms of data in the database and products. It has one hundred thousand first line items. We developed a system connected with AWS services to translate search keywords into different languages and improve search results accuracy on our ecommerce site.
The scalability has really helped us a lot in enhancing the customer experience and ensuring quick results. The ROI is really good, especially when compared with other services on-premises.
Amazon EKS provides good support. The integration and stability are clear and reliable. The scalability is excellent, allowing us to efficiently handle customer experiences and improve operational efficiency.
Sometimes, we face minor connectivity issues. However, it depends on the applications we are using. Improvement might be needed based on different use cases.
We have been using it since 2015.
The stability of Amazon EKS is clear and reliable.
Amazon EKS's scalability is clear and has improved our operational efficiency a lot.
The customer service and support are good, and we have a paid subscription that provides priority support.
Positive
The initial setup was handled by third parties. It involved some complexities, and appropriate inputs were necessary.
We worked with a third-party team for implementation, including many developers.
We did several ROIs, which showed positive results. It's particularly beneficial compared to investing in hardware.
The licensing cost is acceptable.
Before implementing, ensure thorough research and ROI analysis. The implementation should be handled by experienced personnel.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I am working mostly on AWS infrastructure services, such as EC2, EKS, RDS, CloudFormation, IAM, and CloudWatch. I have around one year of experience with Kubernetes and have been using AWS services continuously for three years. My responsibilities include working on server storage, containerization, monitoring, and access policies.
Simplifies Kubernetes setup and management.AWS handles cluster upgrades, patches, and availability.Seamlessly integrates with AWS services like IAM, CloudWatch, and VPC.Access to advanced networking, security, and monitoring tools.EKS automatically deploys the Kubernetes control plane across multiple AWS Availability Zones for fault tolerance.
I have around one year of experience using Kubernetes with AWS.
In my project, AWS EKS has shown stability without any issues.
EKS offers excellent scalability, especially compared to Docker Swarm. The ability to scale based on requirements by deploying additional containers is a strong point for Kubernetes.
I have not contacted technical support regarding EKS.
Positive
I have explored Google Kubernetes Service in my personal projects but did not work on any other Kubernetes projects before EKS.
The initial setup is relatively straightforward when using the AWS Management Console. Setting up clusters and nodes is simplified through AWS's interface compared to on-premises. It took approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete the setup.
I do not have specific details on EKS's pricing and licensing compared to other services. However, in general, deploying in the cloud offers lower latency and high availability and reduces manual intervention and responsibility, leading to some operational efficiencies.
I have worked with Google Kubernetes Service in my personal space but have not evaluated others for professional use.
For large-scale enterprise solutions, Kubernetes is recommended due to its scalability. Despite costing considerations, EKS alleviates the burden of procedural complexities, making it suitable for enterprise-level applications.
I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
For EKS, we deployed a Django application. The application built the whole image and stored it in ECR (Elastic Container Registry). We stored the code repository in GitHub, but the image was in ECR. We also had another repository for the Kubernetes manifest files. So we were deploying it in a different image, and the code was in a different image. We had a whole pipeline for deployment, from CodePipeline to ECR, and then from ECR to Kubernetes.
I work with different AWS solutions, such as Elastic Beanstalk, AWS Lambda, DynamoDB, and VPC. I use services like EC2, S3, and VPC every day, so I'm not including those. I've also used API Gateway, and currently, I also use AWS Bedrock.
The good thing was the integration of services. The only thing we had to think about was how we were pushing the code to GitHub or Bitbucket. After that, everything was taken care of by AWS.
Everything was connected: the code and the real-time deployment. Testing was done within the same pipeline using CodeBuild. CodeBuild was handling multiple tasks: testing the code, deploying it to ECR, and then running it on AWS Fargate for development or testing. Once it was working fine, we had an approval stage. After approval, we deployed it to EKS using the command line from the same AWS CodeBuild process.
The scalability of EKS is good. We've compared it with multiple platforms, and we've also worked with GCP. There are more good options available in GCP compared to EKS.
But the good thing about EKS is that we can use it for serverless deployments using Fargate. It gives you two options: deploy on EC2 or deploy on Fargate. EC2 runs 24/7 and costs you money, but Fargate only runs when you need it. So EKS was really helpful for saving costs with that serverless capability.
I would like to see a warm-up time for AWS Fargate, similar to what GCP Cloud Run has. This would improve internal security. I would also really love to see lower costs compared to other cloud vendors. AWS can get quite expensive.
I've been working with EKS on and off for the last two years. Some of the projects were my own, and some were development projects.
They have good documentation and lots of blogs on Amazon AWS, so we mostly follow those. We haven't reached out to technical support directly. We had a plan for technical support, but it took them more time to fully help us.
Sometimes the issue is on our code side and not on AWS's side. Getting the customer service and support involved in our whole process takes a long time. It's better to research for a few hours and fix it yourself rather than waiting for a week or so.
GKE gives you really good monitoring and logging, where you can see every bit of information flowing in your environment. AWS provides the same thing with CloudWatch, but it's much easier in GKE to see what's exactly going on. So monitoring and the transparency of what's happening would be one thing AWS needs to improve.
The pros of EKS are that it makes deployment really easy. You just need to package your image in ECR, and then everything goes very smoothly. You don't have to worry about running or managing Kubernetes. It gives you a managed control plane, and they replicate the control plane over different regions. So there's very little chance that it will go down. Reliability is really high with AWS.
When we started we had an issue with rollbacks. We had problems because we had to specify certain AWS parameters in order to deploy it properly. We consulted the documentation and resolved it that way.
We did some testing, and that took about one month with it. Then we started with a very small infrastructure on EKS, migrating some of our traditional websites to EKS directly. So, the initial setup took about two months.
But we didn't use it for microservices; we only used it for two services: one was our platform service, and the other was Redis.
In my case, I handled the deployment part. I had a manager, so I just took his approval and gave him the deployment design. He was overseeing everything, but I was doing almost all the AWS work. The developers were really helpful in making the code run correctly with the image versioning.
Users have to maintain things. For example, we faced an issue where we had a lot of requests coming in, and we weren't ready with enough resources at the time. We had to manually increase the Kubernetes nodes. That was an issue with horizontal scaling. It was our mistake because we didn't automate it.
We shifted from EKS to GKE (Google Kubernetes Engine). We are saving around 20% with that change.
I already have recommended it to many people. If you're using AWS for other services, definitely go with EKS because it doesn't make sense to move to another cloud vendor if you're already using everything in AWS. The integration is really good. You get AWS WAF (Web Application Firewall) on top of it, load balancer, GuardDuty, and Inspector. So security-wise, it's really nice to have EKS surrounded by those security tools.
My advice would be to try to go with AWS Fargate initially. Try to understand how ECR (Elastic Container Registry) works because it also costs you money, so make sure your image isn't too big. And if you can, go with AWS CodeCommit, it makes things very fast. And for EKS, they can use Fargate with EKS as a service. So, users don't have to worry about scalability and reliability. It's totally managed from the user's end.
Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten.
Amazon EKS is used as a container orchestration platform. Customers use it to develop applications which are containerized and need to be deployed. Kubernetes is the most popular platform across the industry.
Amazon EKS offers replatforming and migration capabilities to our customers, enabling them to move from AWS to other platforms like AKS with minimal changes. It has also helped in smooth integration with other AWS services, especially API gateways and databases.
The serverless capability of Amazon EKS is quite valuable. Earlier, it was necessary to know the exact configuration, including the number of pods and nodes. Now, with the serverless option, you can deploy everything and AWS handles the infrastructure.
Amazon EKS could improve in its pricing model, particularly for medium-sized customers who might find the support costs high.
I have used Amazon EKS for the past five to six years.
I rate the stability of Amazon EKS as ten out of ten. It is highly stable.
Amazon EKS has high scalability. It can scale very well according to needs, and it doesn't have any issues with scalability.
Amazon's technical support is quite good, especially for those who purchase support services. As a partner, we receive excellent support due to our relationship with Amazon.
Positive
The initial setup of Amazon EKS is much less complex compared to setting up Kubernetes manually on Linux virtual machines, as it takes away the complexities of installing and configuring everything.
We have experience working with both EKS from AWS and AKS from Microsoft Azure, as well as Google GKE.
For those who are Amazon customers and want to deploy containerized applications, Amazon EKS is the best option.
I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.
