Amazon EKS Reviews

I use EKS as an application management system and a second application server. It's connected to Amazon RDS. 

EKS has security features that you can't find in competing solutions.

I'm having difficulty getting my AWS clusters to communicate with my local machine. 

I have used EKS for three years.

Amazon EKS is scalable. We have about 20,000 users. 

Setting up EKS is simple compared to OpenShift. It isn't too complex. We have a hybrid setup due to government data rules. I deployed EKS alone.

I rate EKS seven out of 10 for affordability. Amazon EKS costs us $730 a year. 

I rate Amazon EKS nine out of 10.

I have clients that run on Kubernetes engines. 

The tool works well with the nodes in AWS. It's scalability is also good in terms of architecture. 

I am not impressed with the tool's Amazon console. It also needs to add security features. 

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I would rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten. 

The tool's premium support is good. 

Positive

The solution's deployment gets completed in minutes. You need one DevOps engineer to maintain the solution. 

The solution is pricey. The tool's pricing is monthly. 

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. It is the best platform for Kubernetes. The tool is also compliant. You need a demo to get started with it. 

We run all our microservices across the globe with Amazon EKS. We also use it for development, testing, and maintenance.

In the past, we have faced challenges with scalability and maintenance while running clusters. Amazon EKS is very easy to maintain. So it allows us to focus on our deployment.

The most important aspect of Amazon EKS is that it is easy to set up and very easy to upgrade. So we can focus on maintaining and deploying our microservice. It is also easy to scale and easy to monitor.

Amazon EKS provides very minimum information during the upgrade of the node group. When the upgrade doesn't work well, it doesn't give enough information for us to troubleshoot. So it would be great if Amazon EKS provided more information in such cases. 

Amazon EKS should enable some AIOps.

I have been using Amazon EKS for the past three years.

As a Kubernetes-managed platform, it is pretty stable. You can stabilize the new version when it is available in AWS.

It is easy to set up, and the Amazon EKS control plane accommodates scaling.

Whenever we experience any challenges, we always get a very fast response from AWS support. We are happy with the support provided so far.

We shifted to Amazon EKS because we faced some issues with our old system on OpenShift. OpenShift also has a high license price as compared to Amazon EKS.

We had some challenges at the beginning. It took us a few weeks to get one cluster up. Later, we improved our approach by using Terraform to manage it. Now, we can set up many clusters within one or two hours. We use around 60 clusters now.

We implemented it through our in-house team.

Amazon EKS is very cost-effective. I rate the pricing a ten on a scale of one to ten.

Other teams in the organization are trying to explore Google Kubernetes Engine. However, for our team, AWS is a lot easier. Our team might not move to other cloud providers because running Terraform is very useful for us.

In the internal cluster, we have four hundred people working with Amazon EKS. We have a lot of customers running billions of transactions. Overall, I rate Amazon EKS a nine out of ten.

We mainly use EKS for containers. We use Kubernetes for scalable deployments.

We're using EKS because our customers requested it. They wanted autoscaling functionality. We have our own product, and we deploy it for our customers in Amazon cloud.

The containers are built, registered, and then kept in a repository at the docker site. Our IT department has an account there. From there, it's exposed and we use the Amazon template surveys and cloud formation template. Then, our IT team creates CFTs. The scripts are run, and the containers are deployed from there.

It's a hybrid solution.

EKS provides autoscaling functionality.

I started using EKS about eight months ago.

It's reasonably stable. EKS is used with Fargate.

From what I understand, it's scalable. I haven't heard of any issues.

Setup depends on what kind of architecture you have.

It depends on the script that's prepared. Once the script is done, just one person is needed for deployment.

We have an internal team that takes care of deployment. They're a specialized team.

I would rate this solution as eight out of ten.

My advice is that not every architecture can fit into EKS. You have to really evaluate whether EKS is suitable for the kind of design and architecture you have. Evaluate it first and then attempt it.

Our primary case is using Amazon EKS with all of our data in our MapReduce, map clusters, and our data clusters. And from there, we just input the information using Python and do our analysis using that.

We have problems with setting up virtual environments and installing the right packages. I believe the initial setup could be a better experience and faster customer support.

I have been using Amazon EKS for the past one and half years now.

The stability is excellent.

The scalability is not a problem we currently have five to six thousand employees using Amazon EKS.

Technical support or customer support is good but could be faster.

For us in our company, it is a very straightforward process because they had built a layer that is very useful for the users with just a couple of clicks. But normally, if you ask me in person, I think it is a bit cumbersome.

It can be done in-house but they have to read a lot of documentation from the AWS provider in order for it to make sense.

When you compare it to on-premises it is much better because, with on-premise, we have to look into data security and all these items. Amazon EKS eliminates that and becomes a cost-benefit for us.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give it a six. With the correct technical support individual, you can do well with implementation. If you are not sure about the technical support side for implementation I would wait until you are ready.

We are using EKS for crypto exchange. 

We chose this solution because with crypto exchange you need high performance and easy manageability. It offers highly available architecture, and with two or three Linux servers it distributes all containers through the Linux systems. If that's what you're looking for, it's a really good solution. It also allows for integrating their infrastructure as service capabilities. 

The only important thing that needs to be improved is the EKS dashboard. It could be more user-friendly. 

We've been using this solution for about six months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. 

We're very happy with the customer support. 

The initial setup was average in terms of complexity. We have one very good system admin person in our company, he has a lot of experience and carried out the deployment. We are still in a testing environment, so there are only around 15 users. We have around a million users and eventually they'll all be using it. 

We pay a monthly licensing fee which is quite high but they do provide good service.

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Amazon EKS is for storage, services, and infrastructure. We have about 100 to 120 users on Amazon EKS right now. We'll likely expand by 10 or 15 percent in the next year depending on our customer needs. 

AWS cloud services are flexible and have thorough documentation. AWS also has data centers all over the world.

I would like Amazon EKS to be easier to configure on various environments like Windows or Linux installations

I've been using Amazon EKS for five years.

We use AWS in parallel with other cloud service providers from different vendors, like Azure and GCP. We are not the end customer. It's something we use to deliver services to our customers. We work with a wide range of technologies at the company, which employs around 500 plus people. They work with all major technologies currently available.

Installing Amazon EKS is straightforward. It depends on what needs to be done, but it's not something that takes weeks to deploy. You can do it in a few hours or days. I would need to have a specific scenario to be precise because the steps vary in each installation.

I would like Amazon EKS to be cheaper. Otherwise, it's fine.  

I rate Amazon EKS eight out of 10. 

Amazon EKS is basically a model provided by Amazon that allows you to create and deploy multiple microservices and manage containers. Once the Kubernetes is installed, we can directly create the container, set up ports, and set up new services. We currently have Java containers running.

We have more than 500 people using this solution. We are on version 21.

I like the scalability they're currently providing. Integration was very easy. It was a good experience. 

The connectivity could be better.

I have been using Amazon EKS for more than two years.

It's stable enough. We have had network connectivity issues twice. We weren't able to figure out what went wrong there, and it caused a problem initially. When we restarted it, it began working again.

The scalability is good.

We have called technical support a couple of times. We had an issue with integration with Lambda. But we took the help of AWS and it was resolved.

We have also used the IBM private cloud, but it wasn't user friendly.

Setup can take half an hour to an hour.

For deployment, our technical team was made up of 15 people.

My company paid for the license. 

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I would definitely recommend this solution. It's a very good application, and the scalability is very good.

Our primary use case for Amazon EKS is for running production workloads. The microservices-based modules are broken down and then hosted using EKS.

The most valuable feature to us is orchestration when it comes to deploying. The main ideology behind Kubernetes is that you are breaking down your application into smaller modules. Instead of having a monolithic application, you make it a microservices-based module. Using an e-commerce website as an example, we would break down login's as a single module, registration as a single module and then in the event of an issue one does not impact the other. 

With your small modules, in most cases, they share a backend, and that's how at the service layer you connect them by using an API gateway or a service mesh. This ensures scalability and they don't have any dependencies when it comes to failures. This means you can easily scale and optimize. 

For now I can't suggest any improvements or additional features, the features we currently use we are very happy with. 

We have been using Amazon EKS for 8-9 months.

The Kubernetes solution has been very stable for us, there are no issues to report on that aspect. 

The beauty of Kubernetes is that you can scale it. You just have to define the workload and the scalability capability is managed itself. We just need to define the number of bots or services we want to run and it manages to scale up when needed. 

We have found Amazon to be quite responsive. We have experienced some minor issues and the response time was good. 

With regards to setup, you would need to have a basic understanding of Kubernetes and how it works before you start deploying your production workloads. Once we started working with Kubernetes and got hands-on experience there was not much hassle to roll out to production workloads.

There is no up front licensing cost, as this is a cloud based solution you pay-as-you-go.

The advice I would offer on Kubernetes is with the configuration of your applications. Some are compute-extensive, some are compute-optimized. If you don't configure this correctly it can lead to deadlocks. The compute power has to be enough when it comes to your applications. Some applications need more memory, for example, e-commerce sites need a good response time. In this example, you would want to configure a memory-based application. 

I have tried to host the enterprise content management application of IBM FileNet on Amazon EKS. That's the main use case. 

The solution has very good basic features.

The provisioning is very good we use it for the containerization of COTS applications.

The product is stable. 

If a company needs to scale the solution, it can.

The initial setup is simple. 

We've found the solution's technical support to be helpful and responsive.

There isn't something that is unique or outstanding. 

I'd like to see the solution add a service catalog.

I've used the solution for quite a number of years. It's been around three so far. 

We've found the solution to be stable. Currently, it's used on standard VMs. If we put it on Kubernetes clusters, it is highly reliable as well as easy to monitor, manage, and operate. It's great.

The solution is absolutely scalable. There are many enterprises running their businesses on this.

I'm not deploying anything for customers or a certain number of users. I'm just doing it for my own purposes. I'm learning about it and I'm trying new things. I propose these ideas to customers for various solutions and the implementations are done by another team, the delivery team, later. I can't speak to how many people ultimately end up using it.

Technical support is very good. There is no issue. There's no delayed response for their support. There's no lack of support. They are very helpful and we are quite satisfied. 

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very simple, very straightforward. The instruction guides are all available and it's enough to get a user through the setup process. They are quite helpful guides. 

We have a professional services team that does the job day in, day out. That said, I do it for my learning and I practice something on my own too. Therefore, I am also very capable of handling the initial setup myself. 

We already have costs built into the service given by the particular vendor. If it is on-premise, we buy the software, and we pay some support costs and license costs. However, if it is on the cloud, it is a pay-per-use model. 

I'm an integrator of the solution. 

The solution can be deployed both on the cloud and on-premises. 

We are using the latest version of the solution at this time. I can't speak to the exact version number, however.

I would recommend this solution to others. 

I'd rate the product at a nine out of ten. We're pretty happy with its capabilities so far.