AWS CloudFormation Reviews

I use it to automate the creation of infrastructure using AWS CloudFormation templates. In my project, I must create infrastructure for SaaS-based applications hosted in the AWS cloud. Whenever I onboard a new customer, I need to create the same architectural infrastructure for them, as it's a multitenant architecture, so a lot of the setup remains the same.

By using AWS CloudFormation, I can automate tasks like creating VPCs and load balancers instead of doing them manually each time. The features I like most include improved scalability, resource management, ease of deployment, template creation, and resource provisioning.

There are some limitations with JSON, as the code is written in JSON, which doesn't support commands, looping, or conditionals. This can make the code difficult to read and share across teams. Moreover, the tool only supports AWS. 

Another challenge is related to cost, which I feel could be reduced as it's a bit on the higher side. Additionally, the documentation could be improved, as there is room for enhancement.

I have been working with the product for three years. 

I haven't faced any stability issues with AWS CloudFormation, and I would rate its stability as nine out of ten.

As for scalability, I see improved scalability with no issues, and I would rate it an eight out of ten. In my organization, around 18 people are using AWS CloudFormation.

AWS support is fine and prompt. It is paid. 

The initial setup is quite easy, like filling out a form and submitting it, making the deployment straightforward.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten and would recommend it to others. 

The solution provides the most simplified way of managing resources.

AWS CloudFormation has improved our organization because it provides quick replication of all the infrastructure, and we can automate every process on the DevOp.

The most valuable feature of AWS CloudFormation is the simple tracking of infrastructure.

The speed of the replication process could improve. It can take some time to replicate that could use a speed increase.

In a new release, they should add multiple optimization release features.

I have been using AWS CloudFormation for approximately three years.

I rate the stability of AWS CloudFormation a ten out of ten.

I plan to increase the use of the solution in the future.

I rate the scalability of AWS CloudFormation a nine out of ten.

I rate the support of AWS CloudFormation a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of AWS CloudFormation is straightforward.

I have seen a return on investment using this solution after three years.

The price of the solution is good because it is scalable.

This is a powerful tool and you are able to increase efficiency and return employee workloads.

I rate AWS CloudFormation a nine out of ten.

We support multiple internal developers and deploy and create new S3 buckets for them. We create new users and groups and also create the SNSQS for them. We also support multiple services like creating the Lambda function and have a principle of maintaining the correct privilege for the user. So we manage the AWS service in our organization and deploy the AWS CloudFormation templates to create that kind of AWS service.

It is easy to work from the console and deploy new database services. It is very user-friendly.

Creating the inline policies is not great, and they need to maintain it on a higher level. They create a discrepancy between multiple templates when we do the numbering of those stacks using AWS CloudFormation templates. When we created those stacks in my old organization, a bulk of stacks were automatically wrongly numbered. The filtering of those stacks was painful on the AWS CloudFormation site. I prefer Terraform to manage that.

We have been using this solution for a year at my organization, and I deploy the CloudFormation templates. I write them from scratch, and I deploy them. I extensively used it when I was working on the other cloud. We use the template format version from 2010. It is also deployed on-premises.

It is a stable solution.

It is scalable to an extent, and I rate the scalability a five out of ten. Five DevOps people use this solution.

We've used technical support, and I would rate them a seven out of ten.

I am unsure why we chose AWS CloudFormation, but we later realized that HashiCorp Terraform had more capability than the AWS CloudFormation templates. Initially, it was highly suggested by AWS to make use of CloudFormation at that time, so we started using it.

The initial setup is easy and not tough. I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten.

I don't remember the exact usage cost, but it isn't that expensive.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. It loses three points because of the disadvantage of the naming convention and the stack. Regarding advice, I would be careful when creating the stacks. There should be a proper naming convention that needs to be followed. If there isn't, the stacks will be more painful using the AWS CloudFormation.

I create cloud infrastructure using CloudFormation. It helps us a lot to manage or monitor the whole infrastructure.

CloudFormation gives us control of AWS and any Cloud infrastructure. It creates the whole stack for Cloud services technologies so it's easy to manage the whole system. If we are creating a platform which includes certain services of AWS, it is very difficult for us to see or manage the whole service related to that specific platform.

CloudFormation provides us with a single and easy way to handle those services of that particular application. If I want to shut down the whole system, I don't want to go to each single service related to that specific particular product. Using this solution, I just run the command to the CloudFormation to shut down the whole system. It will shut down each and every service related to that particular system.

If you are a developer or a more technical person, it's very difficult to learn the complete syntax or because CloudFormation includes a new way to write infrastructure code. There is a technology called CDK and it provides a unique way to handle the infrastructure of every Cloud technology. 

CloudFormation should include compatibility with the programming languages or latest technologies. 

I have been using this solution for three a half years. 

We have experienced some issues with stability with current incidents we are developing on a server level. 

I would rate the scalability for this solution an eight out of ten. 

I have collaborated with AWS support many times for big data but not related to CloudFormation. I would rate the support for this solution a ten out of ten. 

Positive

It is very easy to set up. We just have to create a file or the stack for the related services that we are currently working on. Deployment time depends on the stack and on the services. It takes a longer time if done manually. When setting up a simple service, I would rate the set up a ten out of ten. 

I have set up the whole CloudFormation infrastructure on my own because I'm AWS certified. 

We evaluated Terraform. It provides a single platform to manage all the Clouds. We just have to write a single stack code and it is compatible with each and every Cloud platform like AWS, GCP and Azure. The drawback of CloudFormation is that it is only compatible with AWS.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We use CloudFormation for deploying solutions. It's tested manually and then we write a script for CloudFormation. We then copy all the configurations that are needed to automate the process of bringing it to the cloud.

Scripting does just about everything needed to accomplish the task of reinstalling something from scratch. It's the combination of features that's important.  CloudFormation allows us to get the original system up and running in a much shorter time.

I'd like to see a better GUI than we currently have which is basically a script you write. If they were to add graphical components that would enable animation of the installation procedure it would be icing on the cake. We'd be able to preview the installation and visually see what's happening, whether or not anything is missing, and whether you can run parts of the installation in parallel.

I've used this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very scalable. We have some clients with dozens of users and others with thousands of users. 

We've had some experience with technical support and they are very good. 

Positive

The number of people required for the deployment and maintenance of CloudFormation depends on the complexity of the implementation. Deployment involves thorough testing and can be a little complex.

A company can lose a lot of money if a site goes down. CloudFormation helps prevent that loss by bringing things back to working order very quickly.

We chose CloudFormation because it's native to AWS and it's easier to script than Ansible. We use Ansible for taking care of the nitty-gritty details that CloudFormation is not geared towards.

It's important to be aware of the things this solution is appropriate for. We learned the hard way that for our more detailed needs we need to use Ansible. Don't expect CloudFormation to take care of everything. It sets things initially, and then Ansible runs local scripts to take care of the details.

AWS CloudFormation is being used for landing zone creation and DR purposes.

What I found most valuable in AWS CloudFormation is its configurability. The solution is easy to configure. I also like its change management configuration because that's also good.

What could be improved in AWS CloudFormation is its user interface, in terms of graphical design, I prefer WYSIWYG.

I've been working with AWS CloudFormation for several years now.

AWS CloudFormation has good stability and performance.

AWS CloudFormation is a scalable product.

The technical support for AWS CloudFormation is always good and fast. I would rate it five out of five.

The initial setup for AWS CloudFormation was easy.

We had some support from Amazon for the deployment of AWS CloudFormation. The deployment took a day to complete.

AWS CloudFormation doesn't have any cost because it's only the resources that you deploy with the solution that'll incur costs.

We didn't evaluate other options. AWS CloudFormation is our first solution.

I've been working with the latest version of AWS CloudFormation, as it's updated regularly.

My company deploys AWS CloudFormation for multiple customers, and I can't give an exact figure in terms of how many people use the solution.

My rating for AWS CloudFormation is ten out of ten.

My company is a partner of AWS CloudFormation, in particular, an advanced consulting partner.

My advice to new users of the solution is to go through the free online documentation and the video training on the AWS training site. This will help in evaluating and deploying AWS CloudFormation.

We use this solution for application hosting and utilize the caching mechanisms. 

The cost of licensing could be reduced. 

We have been using this solution for one year. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

For the cost point of this solution, the customer service and support is quite good.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and took approximately four weeks. 

The implementation was completed by an external consultant. 

I would recommend the use of this solution. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I use AWS CloudFormation to automate my infrastructure, especially with DevOps engineering.

The solution has helped with automation. I don't have to worry about provisioning machines and ensuring everything is set up. AWS CloudFormation takes care of the entire infrastructure for me.

The solution is free to use, and its automation capabilities are really powerful. 

There could be better error handling. It would be a good way to improve the solution.

I have been using this solution for one year. I currently use the latest version. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. It never fails. 

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. We have it as software as a service. 

We saw a hundred percent ROI. 

The pricing is not expensive. The cost depends on the resources you launch. So, you pay for the resources you use, not the other way around.

I would suggest to read the documentation first before you start. Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.