AWS CodePipeline Reviews

I use the solution for making pipelines. I use it for deployments and CI/CD to make applications as required. I push code on CodeCommit. With the help of CodeCommit, I trigger the code to build and implement. Then, it will be deployed in Kubernetes using ECR and EKS.

Code deployment is the best feature. All the features in CodeCommit, CodePipeline, and CodeDeploy are important for automating the deployment process.

The support team’s response time must be improved.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

I rate the tool’s stability eight to nine out of ten. If I put everything correctly, it works.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. The product can be improved by implementing features available in other tools like Jenkins.

The support persons are experts in what they do. However, I must wait longer than expected to solve my issues.

Neutral

The initial setup felt difficult at first. However, as I learn how things work, it looks like something I can work on. The time taken for deployment depends on each project.

The product is quite expensive compared to other solutions.

Jenkins is much easier than CodePipeline. It is quite complex to build pipelines on CodePipeline compared to Jenkins.

Sometimes, I use CodePipeline to integrate applications on my EC2 server. Sometimes, I use it with AWS Lambda. I am working as a DevOps engineer. I provide technical support to customers who are using the product. I have to demonstrate the customers' issues and try to resolve them. I recommend the solution to experienced people. If someone uses Amazon’s DevOps tool, I will recommend the solution. Otherwise, I will not recommend the product. Overall, I rate the product a seven to eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for CodePipeline is speeding up our development process. The solution is highly automated and allows us to build and deploy code without any effort. It's automatically initiated once I commit my code. 

CodePipeline also helps me to find bugs quickly, increasing my release speed. On the other hand, it helps our customers receive our releases regularly and incrementally. CodePipeline helps us out with our delivery and our customers are happy to see our results in real time through it.

The solution is a continuous integration and delivery mechanism that helps us a lot in delivering our software. This is the most powerful benefit we get from using CodePipeline. It's one of those DevOps concepts recommended for use within the software development lifecycle.

I find performance to be the most valuable CodePipeline feature. It works perfectly and smoothly. We can also transition between the environments with CPLEX. I think CodePipeline is brilliant. 

CodePipeline allows you to focus on your program or your software, rather than worrying about deployment and the build stuff. We save quite a bit of time with CodePipeline.

The only area in my opinion that needs to be improved is the time between build and deployment. AWS should improve build time. We wait up to seven minutes for deployment.

In the next release, I would like to see fewer timeout errors.

I have been using AWS CodePipeline for around three years now.

I have had timeout errors in CodePipeline before. However, this has been acceptable for me as it was in development time and not in production.

My opinion is that this solution is scalable. It's good and it accepts a wide range of programming languages. I can manipulate the order and manage it regardless of the technology I'm using. It's very scalable. It's brilliant; a solution I like very much. It saves a lot of build and deployment effort if we compare it to old-style development. We consume a lot of time building and deploying, just to see our products running.

I have not contacted their tech support.

My impression is that this product is easy to set up. Everything including the documentation is provided.

I would recommend this solution to others as it is one of the most valuable products that can help any DevOps environment for software.

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

The primary use case is for CICD pipelines. It is used to connect CodeBuild and CodeDeploy in a streamlined solution. The AWS CodePipeline only works with the code build and code deploy.

The integration with other services and notifications, along with the approval method for the production environment, helps ensure that the pipeline runs precisely when it should, avoiding unnecessary runs.

The integration with other services is valuable, just like CodeBuild and CodeDeploy. Also, the notification and approval approach in the production environment are very useful.

A bit more control over AWS CodePipeline would make it a better tool. Improved enhancements and features could make it more intuitive.

I have been working with CodePipeline for four years as an MSP and consultant.

If everything is set up properly, CodePipeline is a stable and reliable product. It depends on CodeBuild and CodeDeploy stability.

I would rate the scalability of CodePipeline as low since it is very dependent on CodeBuild and CodeDeploy. Its scalability is limited.

I have not communicated with the technical team of CodePipeline.

Neutral

I would rate the initial setup of CodePipeline as nine out of ten. It is generally easy, but there could be challenges in the first attempt.

I would rate the pricing for CodePipeline at a five out of ten. It depends on other services being used in conjunction with it. The pricing is a bundle.

I advise to go with test runs and see how everything is functioning. It's best not to integrate everything in one go. Challenges might arise while setting up initially.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I use the solution in my company to create an end-to-end flow for the clients' pipelines and to host different applications in different languages.

The tool improves the functioning of my company and makes continuous delivery seamless. Once we set up the pipeline and you connect it to your branch, you can make any changes to different branches anytime. The tool provides an easy way of scanning the entire setup packages and the applications we work with within our company.

The solution's most valuable feature revolves around migration. The tool makes it easy to deliver the software. You don't need to sign in to any script to do anything, so you can just package everything in the tool.

AWS continuously improves the tool's UI.

One downside in AWS is that when you attempt to push a change in, it misses that part, or it could be because some variables are not set correctly. When AWS CloudFormation Stack goes for an update, it gives a failed status. Most of the time, you have to delete the stack and run your pipeline to create a new stack. You can't go back to reverse those changes with the AWS pipeline if a stack fails when you've pushed a change that didn't match up so well.

It is not true that our company doesn't have a backup solution, which will help save everything in case something goes wrong. It is not that a backup is missing but more of a configuration based on how AWS CodePipeline is set up, like how AWS CloudFormation works.

I have been using AWS CodePipeline for over two years.

It is a very stable solution as long as the developers don't add anything that will end up breaking the pipelines. If we communicate with the developers about everything we do in our company, then breakages do not really happen.

Linux is where you may have some limitations on the number of pipelines you can create through the tool. If you want to have more pipelines than the limit, you just need to add a new stack file. One stack file can accommodate a particular number of stacks, so you add a new one, then reference each of the pipelines to that stack, and then continue creating pipelines.

Everyone has their own deployment strategy, depending on their needs. But I think it's pretty popular, especially when you are doing AWS-type deployments. The tool is used by the developers, including the front-end and back-end ones, along with the DevOps engineers.

Currently, I think we are quite comfortable with whatever we have, but I think with time, we may extend its use depending on the needs of our management.

The solution's technical support responds whenever you have an issue, especially whenever you need something sorted out from their side. The engineers are always ready to help. If you have done a wrong configuration, the solution's technical support team will help you have uptime and support when you are offline for an extended time period. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I use IBM QRadar.

When you are done setting it up, sometimes a dev pushes a change and then ends up missing something or adding a variable that doesn't really exist in the stack. Then it won't update, and it won't go through so that it will fail.

The initial deployment process is not very easy, but then you have to set so many things up. You need to have quite a number of files when you are setting up the CI/CD pipelines. You also need to know the approach that you want to use so that you don't end up using a strategy that will not work out very well with the expectations or with the requirements that have been set.

The solution is deployed on the cloud. You can deploy the application on VMs. For most of the production setup, it has to be a private cloud. For other test purposes, you can go to the public cloud to deal with different types of instances. If there are front-end applications that need to be accessed by the users, then it is better to go with the public cloud option as long as one does not have sensitive data.

The type of strategy we have when deploying the tool is something that will depend on the type of front-end and back-end applications. You have your branches where you are deploying from, and then you have a main area where you add all these configurations that you have added in the individual branches when you run to execute the creation of the pipelines and the deployment of the applications. For a well-prepared user, the tool is easy to deploy.

To deploy the tool, you just need to discuss it with your front-end application developer and hire a new back-end developer for the two applications that you need to deploy if you are doing both front-end and back-end there.

I don't have to maintain the tool once the pipeline is set up. As long as one observes exactly what the setup is like, which involves not adding new variables without communicating to the DevOps engineer, everything is pretty seamless.

For the maintenance part, there is a need to basically ensure that if there are any new variables that need to be added, the developers communicate to you with the actual variable or the value. With the variable names and the values, if you are doing deployments on an EC2 instance, you would need to have a look at if there are any changes in the libraries. You would need to also update your AMI. If you use AWS, then you would need to update your Amazon Machine Images (AMIs) so that when you are evaluating your pipeline, there is no clash because of the different versions of the libraries you run.

AWS charges you based on the number of pipelines you have and how active they are, and I also think that the root account user knows about all the price-related metrics. The tool offers the best value for the money one pays for it.

The configuration and setup of the tool are good areas.

For now, I think the tool has more advantages than disadvantages.

The tool is very easy to use for the setup, deployment, and continuous integration processes, so it is an effective product. There is not much need to maintain it. Initially, you need to know exactly how you want to map everything.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to deploy different applications and connect third-party APIs to various projects. I commonly use the Jenkins CI/CD pipeline. I've used it to set up servers. The architecture is very complex and needs a lot of connections, storage, security, and network. We need CodePipeline to complete these processes faster.

I love the fact that the tool can be integrated with different applications. For example, we can integrate pipelines with Slack to schedule tasks and run a bot. If we want to get notified about changes in our server, we can link the pipeline with Slack. It creates a channel where we receive updates on what's happening on the server. It notifies us if the IP address has changed or if there is something wrong with the server. The integration with other applications is fabulous.

The setup time is a bit long. We need a lot of experience to work with it. We need a lot of troubleshooting experience. We need to contact support if things get out of hand.

I have been using the solution for a year and a half.

The tool is very stable. I have not had any issues with the applications I have deployed. I only faced issues during deployment.

The tool is very, very scalable. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We need only one engineer to do the updates.

The support team is good. The response is good. I've not had very complex problems, but for the problems I faced, I received good support.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward, but it is a bit difficult. The deployment takes five to ten minutes. It has a good latency.

People using the solution for the first time must have good experience in troubleshooting. If we do something wrong, we should be patient enough to solve it. We should not get frustrated. A good networking experience in AWS and a good knowledge of IP addresses will also be helpful. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

When you do the microservices, you can build from the source code and package it to the docker image. After that, you can deploy the docker image to the container which is also situated in the AWS CodePipeline. 

The product is a one-stop solution that you can use to integrate, deploy and host your application. 

AWS CodePipeline doesn't offer much room for customization. 

I have been using this solution for three years. 

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

I would rate AWS CodePipeline's scalability a ten out of ten. We use the solution every day, 24/7 to its maximum potential. 

AWS CodePipeline's technical support is good but it comes with a price. It will take you seven percent to ten percent of your total monthly cloud consumption.

Positive

We used Jenkins, GitHub, and GitLab. We switched to AWS CodePipeline since we have an AWS environment and it is more convenient. 

I would rate the product's setup a seven out of ten. There is a lot of work to be done if you need to integrate it with other tools. The solution's setup takes only a couple of hours to complete. We automated the tool's deployment and maintenance. 

The product is cost-effective. 

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

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. If you have a multi-cloud infrastructure, then you need to consider Jenkins, GitLab or GitHub. 

We use AWS CodePipeline for agent deployments, Kubernetes orchestrations, and Argo deployments. We integrate it with multiple applications in the DevOps pipeline for software compression analysis purposes.

The product is cost-effective and integrates well with the AWS environment. It helps reduce complexities in scenarios involving Jenkins and other CI/CD tools. The integration provides an additional security layer.

There could be a possibility of deploying tag-based conditions for different environments using the same code base similar to GitHub. Implementing tag-based conditions in the build spec file is possible, but the process can be simpler. They could provide this tagging functionality in the UI itself. The users could decide pipeline triggers based on the predefined rules.

We have been using AWS CodePipeline for two and a half years.

The platform is stable. It works 99.99% of the time as per the service level agreement.

Around 90% of our executives are using CodePipeline. Only ten percent of executives are using GitLab.

AWS provides user-friendly support services. They resolve the issues instantly.

Positive

CodePipeline is a managed service by AWS. The initial setup process is user-friendly and straightforward.

The product is inexpensive compared to Jenkins and GitLab, where we incur extra costs for maintaining separate servers. AWS offers free business or enterprise support services.

We have integrated AWS CodePipeline with AWS services such as Amazon EKS, ECS, and EC2 for virtual machine deployments. We can integrate it with Lambda for event triggering. It is a useful service. It is straightforward to understand for new users who are learning the application deployment through pipelines. While Jenkins requires installation, server setup, and security considerations, CodePipeline simplifies the process by handling the underlying infrastructure, allowing users to concentrate solely on pipeline scripts.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

CodePipeline assists with the writing of code. It posts reports to our CodeCommit that is connected to our AWS source. 

In AWS, the Cloud DevOps is a managed service from CodeCommit and this has removed the need for a lot of manual steps. Using AWS Pipeline, we are able to add our requirements and it will be automatically scaled. This saves us time and connects to services like EKS. 

 AWS CodePipeline does a very good job as compared to Jenkins. We have saved money using this solution as we we pay for data as it is needed. AWS also offers great security.

I have been using this solution for one year. 

This is a very stable solution.

This is a scalable solution. There is also an option to autoscale. 

The customer service and support for this solution is good. 

Neutral

There are two key roles needed for the setup including the service role for AWS and the service role for CodePipeline. If there are many dependancies involved in the setup, it may take a long time. If a Docker file is already executed, the setup will be quicker. 

The pricing of this solution is dependent upon your needs including how many jobs you daily and how many times the developer will be changing codes and completing deployments.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.