RTS questionnaire · Q12 · Cloud proof

Have you worked with cloud platforms such as Azure, AWS, or GCP? Please specify the platforms and number of years of experience.

A runnable review of how a service is actually put into production: infrastructure declared as code, identity in the pipeline, observability wired to SLOs, and scaling set together with its cost.

Status: reviewed Live cloud workflow AWS 6+ · Azure 4+ · GCP 3+ yrs Jump to live proof ↓

12. Cloud platforms and years of experience

Answer as submitted

“Yes — AWS 6+ yrs (certified), Azure 4+ yrs (AZ-204/500) and GCP 3+ yrs (cloud architect).”
Technical decision: expand. The submitted line lists platforms and years but not what the work consists of. This page is the separate, detailed version: it shows the delivery path on the platform — code, pipeline identity, runtime choice, observability and cost — rather than a service inventory.

Expanded answer

Yes — AWS for 6+ years (certified across Solutions Architect Professional, Security, Database, DevOps Engineer Professional and Advanced Networking), Azure for 4+ years (AZ-204 and AZ-500) and GCP for 3+ years, plus Oracle Cloud exposure. The work covers the full path to production: VPC and network design, IAM and least privilege, containers on ECS/EKS and AKS, serverless for event-shaped work, managed data services (RDS, DynamoDB, DocumentDB, Neptune, Cosmos DB, Cloud SQL/BigQuery), messaging (SQS/SNS, EventBridge, Service Bus, Pub/Sub), infrastructure as code with CDK, CloudFormation and Terraform, and pipelines that authenticate through OIDC instead of long-lived keys.

DecisionWhere it is appliedWhy it is done this way
Infrastructure as codeCDK / CloudFormation / TerraformEnvironments are reproducible and reviewed; no console edit becomes drift.
Runtime shapeECS/EKS, AKS, Cloud Run, LambdaFunctions for event work, containers for steady services, managed data behind them.
Pipeline identityOIDC federation to a short-lived roleNo static cloud credential exists in the repo or in CI variables.
ObservabilityCloudWatch / App Insights / Cloud Monitoring + OpenTelemetryDashboards, traces and SLO alarms ship with the deployable unit.
Network & perimeterprivate subnets, security groups, WAF, private endpointsData services are never reachable from the public internet.
Scaling & costauto scaling with budgets and alarmsGrowth is automatic and its cost is visible before the invoice.
Portabilitysame architecture mapped across AWS, Azure and GCPMulti-cloud experience is the ability to re-map the design, not to memorise service names.

Live cloud delivery workflow proof

The running component below changes its decision/result view through real event binding. Select a step to see the platform decision, the reasoning behind it, and the measurement the environment reports.

LIVE PREVIEW
RUNNING
CLOUD WORKFLOWRUNNING

Choose a delivery step

Select a step to inspect the platform decision, the reasoning and the measured result.

$ cdk deploy / terraform apply — same stack for dev, staging and prod

Environments are declared as code, so a change is reviewed in a pull request, reproducible in another account, and never an undocumented console edit.

stack v42 deployed to dev + prod
manual changes pending: 0  ·  drift detected: none

What "cloud experience" means in practice

Rules I apply. Design the network and the identity model before the compute; keep every resource in code with the same stack promoted per environment; let the pipeline assume a role through OIDC instead of storing keys; put data services in private subnets; ship dashboards, traces and SLO alarms with the service; and set the scaling policy next to the budget alarm. Then the platform choice becomes an implementation detail rather than a lock-in.
Boundary for Q12: this page covers delivery on the platforms and the architecture around it. Certification-by-certification service inventories, landing-zone re-design for an existing enterprise estate and multi-region active/active topology are separate topics.

Source files

Select a file to inspect the proof with syntax highlighting and line numbers. The first file is the code running the component above; the other two are the production shapes of the same decisions.

Acceptance criteria