We had a new product, and we used Amazon Elastic Container Service to do a proof of concept for it.
We used Amazon Elastic Container Service for deploying a web application.
We had a new product, and we used Amazon Elastic Container Service to do a proof of concept for it.
We used Amazon Elastic Container Service for deploying a web application.
Amazon Elastic Container Service is more stable. We didn't do a stress test on the solution, but I could say it cost much less as compared to EC2. We would have needed three or four EC2 instances for the same application, but we could do it on a single incident EC2 container.
Amazon Elastic Container Service’s initial setup is a bit difficult. You need to have experience in order to set it up.
I rate Amazon Elastic Container Service an eight out of ten for stability.
The solution's scalability is good. I rate Amazon Elastic Container Service an eight out of ten for scalability.
Since we took a docker image from the Amazon repository, the solution's deployment was done in a day or two.
If you want to scale without the traditional methods, the solution is a bit cost-effective.
We had virtualized the solution, and we were using it on EC2.
The solution has a great offering for docker images. We didn't have to work from scratch. We could go to the marketplace and directly get the image from there.
Overall, I rate Amazon Elastic Container Service an eight out of ten.
I use Amazon EC2 Container Service to install system instances that need a container. I rely on it when I use microservices.
I like the tool's availability and automated scalability. I need to define the port numbers, and when I have a large load of requests, I can get automated scalability.
Amazon EC2 Container Service is easy to create and manage. I can use it easily on my CI/CD pipeline and deploy solutions.
The product should improve its price.
I have been using the product for three years.
I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service's stability a ten out of ten.
I rate the product's scalability a ten out of ten.
The tool's deployment is easy.
We have seen ROI with the tool's use. It saves time for my support and development teams.
Amazon EC2 Container Service is a trustworthy infrastructure from Amazon. It speeds up delivery from the infrastructure and development teams. I rate it a ten out of ten.
We use Amazon Elastic Container Service to run containers.
Amazon Elastic Container Service serves the function it's supposed to serve.
The solution's user experience and management are really bad.
Amazon Elastic Container Service is not a user-friendly solution. The process of creating everything in Amazon Elastic Container Service is messy. Everything sits in very different locations, and it's not centralized. For example, their networking sits under EC2. You also need to manage the DNS records, which sit under Route 53.
The deployment configuration is located in one place, and the actual EC2 is located in a different place. You have a lot of components to manage, and every one of them is located in a different place, which makes it disorganized.
I have been using Amazon Elastic Container Service for two years.
We never had any issues with the solution's stability, and all the stability issues were user mistakes. When it's that complex, you can make a lot of mistakes. Amazon is doing what they're promising. I can rate the solution a ten out of ten for stability, but the problem is that it's complex. So, you have downtime because of user mistakes.
Amazon Elastic Container Service is a scalable solution. Five people are working with Amazon Elastic Container Service directly, but all our clients are using it.
The solution's initial setup is difficult because you need to be aware of different components in different places.
Amazon Elastic Container Service has a decent price, which is neither cheap nor expensive.
Our company chose Amazon Elastic Container Service because they didn't have the skill set to work with Kubernetes before I joined.
Overall, I rate Amazon Elastic Container Service a six out of ten.
My company uses Amazon EC2 Container Service as a backup.
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is very easy to set up. The solution is not that hard to get around for beginners. The solution's setup phase is good, even though you may not have so much knowledge of the platform.
The solution's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required.
I have been using Amazon EC2 Container Service for three years. I don't remember the version of the solution.
It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven or eight out of ten.
End users are unpredictable, so I think there will be issues in terms of limitations and network issues.
The scalability of the product is fine. I don't use the product's scalability since it is not that high.
I don't intentionally plan to increase the use of Amazon EC2 Container Service.
I have experience with OCloud.
The product's initial setup was very straightforward and not complex.
The solution can be deployed in less than an hour.
The deployment process of Amazon EC2 Container Service depends on why its users want to deploy the product in their environments. Make sure you have your infrastructure and IP setup in place. Once you have all the IPs and your infrastructure setup in place, you will be able to deploy Amazon EC2 Container Service within a few days. EC2 platform provides a very simple interface where you should use the IPs in your router in your virtual machine setup, and then the backup part of the solution should be good to use.
I myself manage the deployment and maintenance processes of Amazon EC2 Container Service.
I take care of the solution's deployment phase by myself
There is no need to pay anything towards the licensing costs of Amazon EC2 Container Service.
I feel that others should try Amazon EC2 Container Service, but it all depends on what others want to deploy from the platform offered by Amazon. Cost-wise, Amazon EC2 Container Service is an okay product. It is better to look at comparisons before proceeding to move to a vendor for a product.
I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.
The tool helps us with maneuverability. Its most valuable feature is autoscaling.
Amazon EC2 Container Service needs to improve the menu design. It needs to improve deployment with better documentation.
I have been using the product for five years.
I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service's stability a nine out of ten.
I rate the tool's scalability a nine out of ten.
Amazon EC2 Container Service's deployment is complex.
Amazon EC2 Container Service has helped us save time.
The tool's cost is good.
I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service a nine out of ten.
I use servers to make web services, mainly to complement the WordPress solution.
EC2 and anything else on the AWS container is reliable. I can trust it.
It's quick and easy to have the solution working.
The solution needs to be more usable. It has a node interface, and it would be better if it could be renewed. It's the same thing with WordPress, Google, and any other company doing the same thing. It would be very good if Amazon went to the front by winning that war of usability.
I've used Amazon EC2 Container Service for 20 years.
The solution is much more stable than IBM. I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.
Amazon Container Service is all about scalability. You should use AWS instead of something else.
It was straightforward to deploy the solution.
The ROI depends on the business. Big companies see an ROI with it, and small companies don't.
The solution is pricey. There are three things a solution can be or have: it can be quick, cheap, or have quality. We can't have three at the same time. If you have money and time, you have quality, which is the case with Amazon. Amazon is pricey, but we can do things quickly, and there's quality.
However, you can have the free tier with Amazon, where it will work for small companies, but only for a short time. If you only want a small VPS, use Google, which will be free forever.
If choosing the solution, contact an expert. I rate Amazon EC2 Container Service a ten out of ten.
The solution helps streamline the entire process for the development and production environments.
I use the tool to manage containerized applications. What I like about Amazon ECS is the interface it provides. Although the configurations can be extensive, such as setting up auto-scaling groups and configuring separate tasks and services for each application, the interface makes it manageable.
We are a small team. I'm the only one handling cloud deployments. We're talking about around 20 to 30 people, not more than a hundred.
I've contacted Amazon for this product, mainly for troubleshooting issues. However, I haven't reached out to them for anything else. The company's founder handles negotiations for pricing and other matters, so I'm not involved in that aspect.
Positive
The solution's deployment is easy since the steps are given in the documentation. I rate it an eight out of ten. It can be completed in a day.
The tool initially required a significant amount of development time on the backend, but in terms of efficiency, it's a one-time effort. Once set up, it can be used for a long time, and maintenance doesn't require much effort. I rate it an eight out of ten.
The product enables users to easily run and manage containers on scalable infrastructure.
Amazon ECS allows users to deploy and manage container applications like microservices or web applications on Amazon clusters. It's easy to install and designed for AWS targets, serving as a serverless container platform. It offers features such as automatic scanning, load balancing, and service discovery to help users manage their container applications.
Amazon ECS comprises components like task definition, which acts as a blueprint for applications, specifying details like the Docker image, CPU, and memory resources. Containers are lightweight, portable executable packages containing everything needed to run an application or service. It defines how containers should be managed, ensuring the desired number of tasks are running and automatically scaling based on demand.
The best thing about Amazon ECS is that it's a fully managed service. It offers scalability, high availability, cost-effective flexibility, and integration with other AWS services. Additionally, it provides some security features.
We noticed a problem where our container doesn't always run, and the traffic in our secured license exceeds 100%, leading to increased container costs. We are working to understand and reduce this traffic to control costs.
I have been working with the product for two years.
Amazon ECS is used by seven users in my company.
My company uses GKE and Amazon ECS. We chose the product as per client requirements.
The tool's deployment is easy.
Amazon ECS is expensive.
In our company, the process for creating Amazon ECS services involves having a repository in it. If there's a need to edit variables or resources, we pull the repository to our local terminal, make the necessary edits, and push the changes back to the repository. Subsequently, we deploy using Jenkins. You can easily define the number of containers running in your cluster and manage them. Autoscaling and load balancing are handled automatically by AWS.
We create clusters, which are logical groups of container systems where tasks can be placed. We can create clusters using the AWS Management Console, AWS CLI, or SDKs. During the setup, we decide whether to use an ECS-optimized Amazon Machine Image for launching instances or create a launch configuration for an autoscaling group.
I rate the product a seven out of ten.