State of Preview Environments Report 2023
Before we delve into the study's findings, let's first review what Preview Environments entail.
Preview Environments allow for code changes to be tested in isolation before merging to master, equipped with all necessary infrastructure and resources. They are created temporarily and automatically provisioned, making them easy to set up and remove. They provide a feature-specific version of staging or production environments, enabling effective testing and debugging. They are instrumental in increasing development team velocity by reducing the time it takes to test and release new features.
Now, let's turn our attention to the findings of the study.
Current Testing Process Within The Teams
The survey found that 80% of software engineering teams use some form of automated testing. Among these respondents, 18% fully automate their testing, while 38% use a mix of automated and manual testing, and 24% mostly rely on manual testing with some automation.
Importance of Preview Environments
Our survey found that 70% of software engineers believe Preview Environments are important (45%) or extremely important (25%). This response indicates a widespread acknowledgment of the importance of preview environments in the software development process.
Preview Environments Adoption With The Organizations
Of the survey respondents, 43% currently use some preview environment solution, while 18% prioritize adopting it this year.
Teams That Benefit Most from Preview Environments
A significant proportion of the respondents (45%) recognized the benefits of preview environments for cross-functional teams, which extend to Developers, QA teams, DevOps/Platform, and Product teams. Meanwhile, 38% of the participants identified Developers as the primary beneficiaries of these environments.
Biggest Benefit of Preview Environments
Respondents cited three primary benefits of preview environments, including shorter feedback cycles and faster delivery (36%), increased autonomy and development speed (28%), and reduce bugs and downtimes (18%). These benefits demonstrate the efficiency and productivity gains that preview environments can offer.
Obstacles to Adopting Preview Environments
The survey revealed three significant friction points to adopting preview environments: implementation time and effort (38%), technical challenges (27%), and absence of easy-to-use solutions (18%). Addressing these challenges is crucial for facilitating the more widespread adoption of preview environments.
Preferred Type of Preview Environments Solution
58% of respondents would seek to build an in-house solution for implementing Preview Environment capability for their team, while 35% indicated a preference to use an external solution instead.
Conclusion
Those results show clearly that Preview Environments have gained significant popularity among software engineering teams. The survey found that 70% of software engineers believe preview environments are valuable, and a significant proportion of respondents recognized the benefits of preview environments for cross-functional teams, extending to developers, QA teams, DevOps/Platform, and product teams. The primary benefits cited by respondents include:
- Shorter feedback cycles & faster delivery.
- Increased autonomy & development speed.
- Reduced bugs and downtimes.
The biggest obstacles to adoption were implementation time and effort, technical challenges, and a need for easy-to-use solutions.
With more accessible solutions, well-documented case studies, and high perceived value, we predict that preview environment adoption will significantly grow in 2023 (and beyond).
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
Suggested articles
The cluster coming up is the easy part. What catches teams off guard is what happens six months later: certificates expire without a single alert, node pools run at 40% over-provisioned because nobody revisited the initial resource requests, and a manual kubectl patch applied during a 2am incident is now permanent state. Agentic control planes enforce declared state continuously. Monitoring tools just report the problem.
The instinct when setting up Kubernetes observability is to instrument everything and send it all to your APM vendor. That works fine at ten nodes. At a hundred, the bill becomes a board-level conversation. The less obvious problem is the fix most teams reach for: aggressive sampling. That is how intermittent failures affecting 1% of requests disappear from your monitoring entirely.
Scaling your deployments to zero is only half the battle. If your cluster autoscaler does not aggressively bin-pack and terminate the underlying worker nodes, you are still paying for idle metal. True environment sleeping requires tight integration between your ingress layer and your node provisioner to actually realize FinOps savings.
The structure, table, tool list, and code blocks are all worth keeping. The main work is fixing AI-isms in the prose, updating the case study to real metrics, correcting the FAQ format, and replacing the CTAs with the proper HTML blocks. The tool descriptions need the "Core strengths / Potential weaknesses" headers made less template-y, and the intro needs a sharper human voice.
For years, Red Hat OpenShift has been the safe choice for heavily regulated, on-premise environments. It operates as a secure fortress. But in the public cloud, that fortress acts as an expensive prison. Paying proprietary per-core licensing fees on top of your standard AWS or GCP compute bill is a redundant "middleware tax." Escaping OpenShift requires decoupling your infrastructure from your developer experience by running standard, vanilla Kubernetes paired with an agentic control plane.
Agentic Kubernetes resource reclamation is the practice of using an autonomous control plane to continuously identify, suspend, and delete idle infrastructure across a multi-cloud Kubernetes fleet. It replaces manual cleanup and reactive autoscaling with intent-based policies that act on business state, eliminating the configuration drift and cloud waste typical of unmanaged fleets.
Kubernetes focuses on container orchestration, but the reality on the ground is far less forgiving. Provisioning a single cluster is a trivial Day-1 exercise. The true operational nightmare begins on Day 2. Teams that treat multi-cloud fleets like isolated pets inevitably face crushing YAML configuration drift, runaway AWS bills, and severe scaling bottlenecks.
.webp)