Cloud Architecture Consulting & AWS Architecture Review
Cloud architecture designed to hold up under real traffic, real load, and real audits. We design systems before budget is committed and problems are expensive.
Systems built to ship fast. Not built to run long.
Growth without a plan
Services that expanded organically, where every team just added what they needed. The architecture was never designed. It accumulated.
Data layer under pressure
A database schema that made sense for 10,000 users is actively hurting performance at 500,000. Query patterns changed but the storage layer didn't.
No ownership boundaries
Service dependencies are unclear. Every change requires four people on a call because nobody is confident about what touches what.
The cost of moving fast
These are not engineering failures. They are the natural result of shipping under pressure without periodically stepping back. The longer you wait to assess, the more expensive the correction becomes.
We review your system as it actually runs. Not as it's documented.
We talk to the engineers who maintain it, trace where latency builds up, look at where incidents cluster, and map the real dependency graph. Then we design what comes next.
Map the real system
We trace actual traffic, dependency paths, and failure patterns. Where does latency accumulate? Where do incidents repeat? What's undocumented?
Design for your trajectory
Plan for the next stage of growth using your team's capacity and current constraints. We document the expected gains, tradeoffs, and assumptions, along with the changes that would require another review.
Preserve what works
If there is existing infrastructure worth keeping, we design around it. If something needs to go, we say that clearly and explain the reasoning.
Every recommendation comes with the tradeoff analysis. No black-box answers.
A documented architecture decision. Not a slide deck of possibilities.
You receive a written deliverable with the reasoning behind every major choice. A clear map of what changes, in what order, with realistic effort estimates tied to your team's actual capacity.
Your engineers understand the system they are building toward. Not just the tickets in front of them.
Architecture decision record
Every major choice documented with the reasoning, alternatives considered, and tradeoffs accepted.
Sequenced migration plan
What changes first, what depends on what, and realistic effort estimates for each phase.
Risk assessment
Where the current architecture may fail as demand grows, the evidence behind each risk, and which risks to address first.
Results
Traceable
Current-state dependencies, failure paths, cost drivers, and ownership are mapped from observed evidence.
Decision-ready
Options are compared against reliability, security, performance, cost, migration, and operating constraints.
Sequenced
The target architecture includes transition states, prerequisites, acceptance checks, and rollback points.
AWS Advanced Tier Services Partner
Validated delivery designations in Amazon ECS, Amazon RDS, and AWS Transfer Family. Demonstrated production delivery reviewed by AWS.
Related services
Cloud Platform Engineering
When the architecture is decided, we build and operate the platform. Same team, continuous context.
Scaling & Bottleneck Analysis
Identify exactly where your system will break under load, before it happens in production.
Reliability Review
Assess failure modes, recovery paths, and incident readiness across your production systems.
What a cloud architecture assessment should establish
An architecture review is useful when it connects an observed production problem to a decision, a responsible owner, and a way to test the proposed change.
AWS architecture and Well-Architected review
Trace a representative request through identity, networking, compute, storage, and dependencies. Review failure isolation, recovery, operating visibility, security boundaries, and cost attribution. You receive a list of risks, the evidence for each one, and the recommended order of changes. Completing a checklist does not certify the system.
Use the AWS review checklistArchitecture design versus reliability assessment
Architecture consulting decides the boundaries and trade-offs of a target system. A reliability assessment tests whether current operations can meet agreed service and recovery objectives. If an incident reveals an ownership or dependency problem, both may be needed, but each should have its own acceptance evidence.
Cloud reliability assessmentCheck whether a boundary earns its complexity
Before adding a distributed component, record the measured constraint it addresses and whether the team can deploy, debug and recover it. This short worksheet helps surface missing evidence. It does not score architecture quality or replace a workload assessment.
Review architecture complexityAWS Advanced Tier Services Partner
For architecture work on AWS
Ampity is an AWS Advanced Tier Services Partner. The tier reflects company-level AWS experience and capability; the Service Delivery designations below are separate, service-specific credentials.
Explore our AWS delivery practiceAWS Service Delivery specializations
Choose the expertise that matches your workload. These designations recognize delivery experience with specific AWS services. They do not mean that every system needs those services or that a badge guarantees a project outcome.
Amazon ECS Delivery
Container applications moving into production
Relevant when your application needs an ECS deployment model, including workloads on AWS Fargate. The work connects task sizing, service scaling, deployment health, identity and network boundaries to your application's operating needs.
Agree deployment checks, rollback behavior, observability and ownership before cutover.
AWS's announcement lists Ampity for Containers and Serverless Computing.
AWS announcement: Ampity ECS Delivery recognitionAmazon RDS Delivery
Database migrations with a recovery plan
Relevant when a relational database needs migration or modernization on Amazon RDS. Assess engine compatibility, data integrity, connection behavior, backup and recovery, availability requirements and query performance before changing the production path.
Define data reconciliation, restore checks and workload-specific acceptance criteria.
AWS's announcement names Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL and Amazon RDS for MySQL. This recognition does not cover every RDS engine.
AWS announcement: Ampity RDS Delivery recognitionAWS Transfer Family Delivery
Partner file exchange with controlled access
Relevant when partners or business units exchange files through managed transfer workflows. Design identity, storage access, encryption, audit trails and account boundaries around who may send, receive and process each file.
Test permissions, transfer failure handling and the handover to downstream processing.
AWS's announcement lists Ampity as an AWS Transfer Family Delivery Partner.
AWS announcement: Ampity Transfer Family Delivery recognitionFrequently asked questions
What should a cloud architecture design deliver?
Explain how workloads are divided and connected, including identity, networking and data flows. Describe availability, recovery, observability and cost assumptions. Record alternatives, implementation order, acceptance checks and operational ownership.
How do you choose between containers and serverless?
Compare workload duration, demand variation, latency, deployment control, state, integration needs and team operating capability. Model the cost and failure behavior of credible options. Neither containers nor serverless is the default answer for every workload.
Does high availability require a multi-region design?
Not always. The business recovery objectives, failure scenarios, consistency requirements and operating capacity determine the design. Multi-region operation adds replication, failover and testing obligations, so it needs a justified requirement rather than a diagram preference.
Can you design around our existing cloud infrastructure?
Yes. The review starts with current accounts, networks, identity, dependencies and operational constraints. Proposed changes should identify what can stay, what must change, and how to transition safely without treating the existing environment as disposable.