AWS Lambda Reviews

There's a lot of use cases. The solution is used for immediate processing, so it's used everywhere. When data comes in, you process a Lambda function to tag it and categorize it. I've used Lambda functions to process inbound videos to make them smaller. I've used a Lambda function as a serverless backend for a customer-facing app, so I didn't have servers running.

With a highly variable load, our idle cost is pretty much zero, and we haven't had any scale barriers, so we've scaled smoothly.

I think the most valuable features are event-based triggers. Basically, a Lambda function doesn't get called because you say, "I'm going to call it." It gets called because something happens: a file arrives, a message arrives, or a database gets written. It's really good for a reactive style when you want things to happen as soon as something else happens. That's the best pattern.

There's room for improvement in the solution's warm start, which refers to the minimum time it takes to start up a Lambda function if you haven't been running it. 

I have been using Lambda since 2014, so about eight years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This solution is scalable. We have hundreds of thousands of users, so everything in Lambda gets used a little bit at a time in different parts of the process. We have plans to increase our usage in the future. 

I would rate the technical support as a ten out of ten. You are able to pick a language, pick an environment, and deploy it. 

Positive

It is pretty straightforward to set up this solution. 

We've run some scenarios. For example, say you have three million requests per month, and 120 milliseconds each time someone requests. The total cost ends up being $2.73 a month, which is very cheap for what you get.

There's two charges for this solution. There's the charge for how many times you call a Lambda function, which is 20 cents for every million function calls. Then there's also the size and amount of time that the Lambda function runs, which is measured as 0.0000166667 dollars. It's a fraction of a penny for every gigabyte second. A gigabyte, if you ran it for like a million seconds, would cost one dollar. It computes by the cycle, and it's very cheap.

My advice is to think about the architecture first and don’t just throw your code into Lambda. Think about how your application is designed because using serverless is different.

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten. It's a very critical service. 

I am using AWS Lambda for building web and mobile applications.

AWS Lambda has helped my organization by making it easier to code and it is less costly.

The valuable feature of AWS Lambda is the ease of coding. It is easier to code using the solution.

AWS Lambda can improve its file system-based sharing capabilities and restrictions.

I have been using AWS Lambda for approximately six years.

AWS Lambda is stable.

The scalability of AWS Lambda is good.

We have approximately 1.3 million users using the application that uses the solution. We have 10,000 to 20,000 new users added every month.

The support from AWS Lambda is good.

I rate the support from AWS Lambda a four out of five.

The initial setup of AWS Lambda is easy. The full implementation took us there to four months.

I rate the setup of AWS Lambda a four out of five.

We did the implementation of AWS Lambda in-house.

We migrated from an on-premise server to the cloud with the Lamda solution and we found it less than one-10th of the cost of what it used to be. We have 90 percent savings.

I rate the ROI of AWS Lambda a four out of five.

AWS Lambda license is paid on a monthly basis.

I rate the price of AWS Lambda a four out of five.

My advice to new users is I would recommend strongly going with AWS Lambda for all API-based solutions.

I rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten.

We are building a Twitter-like application in the boot camp. I have used Lamda for the integration of the post-confirmation page in the application. This will help you get your one-time password via mail. You can log in with the help of a post-confirmation page. We didn’t want to set up an instance specifically for confirmation. We used the Lambda function so that it goes back to sleep after pushing up.

The tool changes its UI every month which is very frustrating for me. I don’t know why AWS keeps changing the UI. They can’t stick to a specific one.

I have not faced any stability issues with the tool.

I know that AWS has flexible support but if I encounter any problem, then I just Google it. I get a lot of support from Google, YouTube videos, and Discord channels.

The solution’s initial setup was neither easy nor complex. I started learning about cloud services about six to seven months ago and already had a background in it. However, the implementation was not easy since a lot of errors just popped up. I had to check the CloudWatch logs and look into the bugs in the code. It wasn’t interesting. The deployment took around two hours to complete.

I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. The solution works fine for us and we didn’t require the need to maintain it. I didn’t face any problems working with the product.

Our primary use case for AWS Lambda is a backend service module. Thanks to this solution, we do not need to worry about hardware or resource utilization. It saves us time. 

It saves us a lot of setup time. And, because it's our code, we will use Lambda. Lambda is the best AWS product we can use for running our code and it is very quick for the developers. All they have to do is commit their codes and, once we set up our code pipeline once after committing the code and building and deploying to our Lambda, the project will be up and running in the market. This setup is better than managing on EC2. We don't need to use EC2 in this case. 

My opinion is that the integration could be improved in this solution. We have had some difficulties integrating the EC2 module, but we found a solution for that by ourselves. I would say the integration needs to be improved.

I have been using AWS Lambda for about three years.

This solution is very stable.

My impression is that this solution is 100% scalable. The Lambda function is the most powerful product that the developer needs. 

We have one Lambda used by 50 to 100 people, and then we have another Lambda method that could be used by thousands.

My impression is that the setup was quite straightforward.

Overall, I would rate this solution a 10, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. I would definitely recommend this solution to other people.

AWS Lambda is a serverless architecture. So, you can use three languages like Java, Python, and Node. You can write your code in any language. The main use is if you have a team and your team has one Java developer, one Python developer, or one JavaScript developer. You all want to work together and in a single project, you can use multiple languages, by any of the users.

All of the features are very good and useful.

The most valuable feature for example Java needs a server, so you need to host your application somewhere. AWS Lambda is itself serverless, and it is connected to the API gateway, and you can directly call the API through the API gateway and connect through AWS Lambda.

I would like to see the five zero four AWS Lambda invocation fixed. This is basically a time-out error. Having consistency in this aspect will enhance how robust the solution is for us.

I have been working with AWS Lambda for the past two years.

The stability overall is good. As I mentioned before sometimes you get a couple of time-out errors that need to be fixed.

It is highly scalable. You can use any of the features I mentioned, and you can write a number of functions in one project. We already use around twenty-five functions in one project.

The initial setup is difficult. You need a lot of the code background. You should be at least five to ten years as an experienced developer.

If it is a single deployment it will not take very much time. However, it does take more time as you increase code and volume.

The clients have seen a return on investment.

The price is expensive and is based on usage. The more users you have the higher the cost.

I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten.

AWS Lambda is good because if you chop up your application into small pieces and that is something that can be accomplished as a Lambda-based solution on the cloud, you will save on the cost of your applications.

The reason Amazon AWS has provided AWS Lambda is to allow people to write small pieces of application tasks that will run on Amazon's own internal servers.

The most valuable feature of AWS Lambda, from a conceptual point, is its functions. For example, it's mathematical templates into which you can write, and create your solution. You write small pieces of a solution under given parameters.

I have been using AWS Lambda for approximately two and a half years.

Scalability is an in-house feature of AWS Lambda, it can scale well.

My team in the company is using this solution. I do not know how many other teams in the company might be using it.

We plan to use the solution in the future because there is always a use case for it.

I rate the scalability of AWS Lambda a ten out of ten.

I rate the support from AWS Lambda a ten out of ten.

Positive

We did not use another solution prior to AWS Lambda.

The initial setup of AWS Lambda is easy, it can be done with a couple of clicks.

We use Amazon's CodeBuild, which does the deployment for us, and we use CodeDeploy to write our software application, which submits the code into our Git DevOps operation. From there it gets built and deployed automatically. It's similar to a CICD operation.

We have seen a return on investment using AWS Lambda. We don't have to pay for the solution, such as whatever logic that is implemented. If we had to build it ourselves as a microservice, we would be paying for the infrastructure.

There are other similar solutions, such as Google Cloud Platform or Microsoft Azure. They might be better for small tasks. Everyone can use the cloud providers' solution rather than building their own infrastructure. Any cloud provider has benefits.

I would advise others to try the solution.

I rate AWS Lambda a nine out of ten.

My primary use cases for AWS Lambda is collecting data from other systems through API, pre-calculations, and ETL.

The feature I found most valuable about Lambda is the fact that it's serverless.

I would like the layers to have a bigger volume. I would like to be able to add more. I don't want to be limited by the layer. 

In addition, writing temporary data to Lambda is not straightforward. Sometimes I use the S3 for that. I found it a little bit challenging. 

I have been using AWS Lambda for a couple of years.

My impression is that it is a stable solution.

I would rate the scalability of this solution a 10, on a scale of one to 10, with one being not scalable and 10 being very scalable.

I have never used Amazon's tech support.

I would say the initial setup was straightforward.

We required two technical staff to do the deployment and maintenance.

We have about 15 to 20 users of Lambda in our company and plan to expand.

We have some services deployed that we need to consume in Lambda because it's a faster and better implementation. We have a model that microservice in the product, which we implement in AWS. For that reason, we use Lambda.

The solution has improved our organization by providing us with better communication with the different services, dependencies, and implementations our clients require. The solution is faster and the consumption is really good.

There are some restrictions. For example, we have some services that if you have more than 60 seconds in consumption of this service, we don't use it, because they have that restriction with the gateway. Those services we implement with Fargate and with Docker.

The most valuable feature is that there is no need to implement it in a server because it is a service.

The 60 seconds limitation with the consumption of the service is really restrictive for a service and the solution can be improved by eliminating that.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is easy but you do need some experience.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The return on investment is good because it is a Cloud-based solution that doesn't require maintenance or a server on-premises saving you money.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

One person with AWS knowledge is sufficient for deploying and maintaining the solution.

We currently have around 160 people using the solution.

All of the products we implement are in AWS so we do have plans to increase the usage of Lambda, Fargate, and all of the services in AWS to help speed up the implementations.

For anyone thinking about using the solution, you must make sure you have some experience in AWS or another cloud, maybe Azure, and have some experience with software development. If you don't have software development skills, maybe you have experience in deploying services on IIS or something like that.