I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it is very good. I can't really say for certain what should be improved because I haven't really explored it a lot. However, what I've been using it for has been very good. If there could be training for AWS Auto Scaling, that would be fine. If you could add more training on how to use it correctly and on the functions that I haven't used before or some people have not really used before, that would help. If there could be more documentation and training on it, that would be beneficial.
It is sometimes very critical to deploy on AWS since some servers are already running in the background. There are challenges for employees on how to deploy at a given time. It requires a downtime before deploying the Auto Scaling group.
AWS Cloud Re-Start Program Specialist at Orange RDC (Congo)
Real User
Top 5
Nov 5, 2024
Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer, like configuring the ALB, the target group, and all the steps. This complexity led me to migrate to CloudFormation, which simplifies the deployment process.
I haven't experienced any specific challenges with Auto Scaling. It automatically scales as necessary and reduces when the load decreases. There hasn't been a need for improvements.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Broadcom, Splunk and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: January 2026.
It has latency issues. It depends on the distribution used, whether it's Amazon Linux, Windows Linux, etc. Occasionally, there are latency issues, which might lead to slower performance. However, this is more related to network concerns rather than the product itself. So, the network's impact on performance would be the primary factor. At times, when everything is in software, especially regarding file operations, there can be notification delays. Occasionally, it takes longer than expected. This is why I rated this solution as a nine out of ten – because of these occasional issues.
The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability help improve the efficiency of applications by providing visibility and insights into system performance.
Application Performance Monitoring and Observability involve tracking and analyzing the performance of applications and infrastructure. APM focuses on detecting and diagnosing performance issues, while Observability emphasizes gaining insight into the internal state of systems. By combining these approaches, IT teams can ensure...
I'm not really sure what improvements I would want to see in AWS Auto Scaling because I haven't really used it extensively or explored most of it. To the extent that I've used it so far, I think it is very good. I can't really say for certain what should be improved because I haven't really explored it a lot. However, what I've been using it for has been very good. If there could be training for AWS Auto Scaling, that would be fine. If you could add more training on how to use it correctly and on the functions that I haven't used before or some people have not really used before, that would help. If there could be more documentation and training on it, that would be beneficial.
It is sometimes very critical to deploy on AWS since some servers are already running in the background. There are challenges for employees on how to deploy at a given time. It requires a downtime before deploying the Auto Scaling group.
Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer, like configuring the ALB, the target group, and all the steps. This complexity led me to migrate to CloudFormation, which simplifies the deployment process.
I haven't experienced any specific challenges with Auto Scaling. It automatically scales as necessary and reduces when the load decreases. There hasn't been a need for improvements.
In comparison to other public clouds, the product is costly.
The tool must include AI features. The configuration process is not straightforward.
While I haven't found any significant need for improvement in AWS Auto Scaling, the setup can be a bit complex in some situations.
The solution's infrastructure scalability and elasticity could be improved.
The solution must improve automation.
The product’s pricing needs improvement.
The speed of the solution must be improved. It should also improve communication.
AWS Auto Scaling's documentation could be better. At present, we have to recall the last issues we encountered and the steps used to resolve them.
It has latency issues. It depends on the distribution used, whether it's Amazon Linux, Windows Linux, etc. Occasionally, there are latency issues, which might lead to slower performance. However, this is more related to network concerns rather than the product itself. So, the network's impact on performance would be the primary factor. At times, when everything is in software, especially regarding file operations, there can be notification delays. Occasionally, it takes longer than expected. This is why I rated this solution as a nine out of ten – because of these occasional issues.
The solution is not out-of-the-box and you have to study to use it. It should be more easier to use.
I would like to improve the price of the licensing. It could be cheaper.
The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers.