How to Migrate from AWS App Runner to EKS Before You Hit Its Limits

AWS App Runner is presented as a simple deployment option for single-container, request-driven HTTP services, but with fixed limits including a maximum of 4 vCPUs and 12 GB of memory per service, no sidecars, GPUs, batch jobs, StatefulSets, or advanced traffic-management features. The piece argues that existing users should plan alternatives because it states AWS has closed App Runner to new customers and does not intend to add features, while noting that low-traffic and early-stage workloads may still fit the service well. It identifies larger compute requirements, multi-container needs, GPU or queue-based workloads, advanced policies such as mTLS and canary releases, and sustained utilization costs as primary reasons to consider Amazon EKS. EKS offers Kubernetes flexibility, shared node capacity, GPU support, custom autoscaling, and more deployment controls, but shifts responsibility for networking, observability, upgrades, security, and cluster operations to the customer. The proposed migration follows five phases: inventorying current services, adapting containers for Kubernetes probes and shutdown behavior, establishing a production EKS environment with IAM and ingress components, gradually shifting traffic through weighted DNS routing, and retiring App Runner resources after validation. It also emphasizes that migration risks commonly arise from health checks, secrets, IAM permissions, networking, scaling behavior, and operational maintenance rather than Kubernetes manifests, and it suggests internal developer platforms such as Qovery as one way to preserve a simplified developer workflow on EKS.

Use this post, company, and trend context to find content marketing opportunities, perform competitive analysis, or address product feature gaps via the Plushcap MCP server or the Plushcap API.