Google Kubernetes Engine Review

An improvement over our traditional methods but additional security is required

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is to arrange the correct CICD (Continuous Integration / Continous Deployment) conveyor to provide for continuous changes in production.

How has it helped my organization?

The improvement is mainly connected to the speed of change implementation. In the case of the automatic convenor, we spent less time due to the automation of the process. Before using this solution, it was a lot of manual tasks and a lot of people participated in the process.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the horizontal staging of applications. Other important features include isolation of applications and more effective usage of infrastructure due to less consumption of resources by containers.

What needs improvement?

I think that security is an important point, and there should be additional features for the evaluation of data in containers that will create a more secure environment for usage in multi-parent models.

For how long have I used the solution?

One year (pre-production).

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have not seen any signs of instability, and have an optimistic view of the solution.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is an important feature of this solution, and we are happy with it.

We have approximately one hundred people using the solution. It is mostly developers and quality assurance people who are working on the preparation for CICD.

Once we move to production, next year, our usage will increase.

How are customer service and technical support?

I think technical support is good enough.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not use an integrated solution prior to this. Rather, it was done in a more traditional way. This included virtual machine creation, installation of additional software, and connection to an external CICD conveyor, etc. We are switching because we are interested in more widely using continuous technology.

Our motivation for switching is to simplify creating a CICD process. We have a lot of small changes and after testing, we will be using an automated process for product delivery.

How was the initial setup?

We are currently in a test phase and are estimating the feasibility of moving this to production. Our plan is to finalize testing by the end of this year and move the solution to production at the beginning of next year.

We have two people working the maintenance of this solution, but frankly speaking, it is not enough. We are planning to improve our skills and capacity and expand these resources.

What about the implementation team?

We communicate directly with somebody who is part of OpenShift. They are top guys and have enough experience to help us build our system. It's no problem.

We do not have a local team in Russia, but at some point, that may change and we will use a local integrator. 

What was our ROI?

We are planning to reach a positive ROI using this solution.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We are planning to use external support, and hire a commercial partner for it. Usually, this is about twenty percent of the solution.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We have been watching what is happening the market, and for some time it has been obvious that Kubernetes has the most followers and most potential. This is why we are starting with Kubernetes from the beginning.

What other advice do I have?

My advice is not to implement this solution unless there is a genuine demand for it from the business side. It can be useful to start from the bottom of the infrastructure and take it to the highest level because it requires changes in the development and business levels to work with this technology.

I think that there is enough documentation available to start to work with this product. The technology provides a very good opportunity to grow and improve.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More Google Kubernetes Engine reviews from users
...who compared it with Amazon Elastic Container Service
Add a Comment