AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

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.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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.

Private Cloud

AWS Lambda is mainly used for automation. To simplify, in AWS Lambda, I define a function, and I can invoke that function or feature whenever I want and on schedule.

For example, if I have data to collect daily from different services, I schedule the AWS Lambda function to do that, and it does the job. That's one of the use cases of the tool.

Another use case for AWS Lambda is when you have multiple servers running and need to shut down the servers at night. You can configure an AWS Lambda function that would shut down the servers every night on schedule. You can also use it as a backend and invoke it through API, so you deploy your backend from an AWS Lambda function, then link it with the API gateway, then you can invoke your function through the API.

What I like best about AWS Lambda is that it's feature-rich, and I appreciate that. I also like that it's stable and supports many languages.

What could be improved in AWS Lambda is a tricky question because I base the area for improvement on a specific matrix, for example, latency, so I'm still determining if I can be the judge on that. However, room for improvement could be when you're using AWS Lambda as a backend, it can be challenging to use it for monitoring. Monitoring is critical in development, and I don't have much expertise in the area, but you can use other services such as Xray. I found that monitoring on AWS Lambda is a challenge. The tool needs better monitoring.

Another area for improvement in AWS Lambda is the cold start, where it takes some time to invoke a function the first time, but after that, invoking it becomes swift. Still, there's room for improvement in that AWS Lambda process.

In the next release of AWS Lambda, I'd like AWS to improve monitoring so that I can monitor codes better.

I've been using AWS Lambda for one year and a half.

AWS Lambda is a stable product.

I have yet to contact the AWS Lambda technical support team because I haven't experienced any difficulty with the tool.

One of the reasons my company went with AWS Lambda is that it's serverless, so you don't need to manage any server because AWS will handle it. This means that a lot of responsibilities will be taken care of by AWS, which helps you avoid many problems.

Another reason for choosing AWS Lambda is its stability. Latency is also not a problem on AWS Lambda, allowing you to use different services in your AWS account securely. For example, when you want to reach the AWS billing service, you can do it within the environment of your AWS account without an external tool, which makes it very secure. AWS Lambda also helps you reach other AWS accounts securely because it depends on roles rather than search keys or passwords.

The initial setup for AWS Lambda is straightforward. It's effortless to start using AWS Lambda.

Price-wise, AWS Lambda is very cheap. It's not free, but it's not that expensive.

I'm using the latest version of AWS Lambda because when a framework or tool is deployed on a public cloud, it's always the newest version, and you don't get to choose the version.

I'd tell first-time users of AWS Lambda, or anyone looking into using the tool, that you can deploy every application within AWS Lambda, and it's very easy to set up and deploy. You can also use it with any application regardless of language because AWS Lambda supports many languages such as Go, Bison, Node, GS, and .NET. The tool is very code-agnostic, and not coded with programming languages, so you can still use Docker images to start your AWS Lambda function, for example.

My rating for AWS Lambda is nine out of ten because of how hard AWS worked on having good latency, security, and an intuitive start. The tool supports different languages and is stable, so I gave it a high rating.

I'm a customer of AWS Lambda.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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. 

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

I use AWS Lambda for serverless computing, and I am charged only for the AWS Lambda instances I use. I value its cost efficiency because it activates instances based on load and tasks initiated.

I appreciate AWS Lambda for its serverless computing, with charges incurred only for the used instances. This serverless architecture enables the activation of instances based on task load, contributing significantly to cost efficiency.

Currently, I don't have any specific suggestions for improvements. However, enhancements could be introduced to better satisfy customer requirements.

I have used AWS Lambda for around two years.

The initial setup of AWS Lambda is quite straightforward and easy.

I rate the stability of AWS Lambda as a ten out of ten, suggesting that it is highly stable.

I rate the scalability of AWS Lambda as eight out of ten. Although it is stable and scalable, the number of instances can be optimized for other workloads when needed.

I rate AWS Lambda's technical support an eight out of ten. The support can be improved by increasing the number of support personnel.

Positive

The initial setup of AWS Lambda is quite easy.

The pricing of AWS Lambda is reasonable. It's beneficial and cost-effective for users regardless of the number of instances used.

I recommend Amazon Web Services Lambda to other users. I rate AWS Lambda as one of the best solutions, giving it a ten out of ten overall.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Essentially, I use AWS Lambda to run Python code. Usually, I set up triggers for other parts of AWS. It's really basic programming tasks.

AWS Lambda is more integrable than other code software, which is a significant advantage. Given my software development experience, I find its integration with the cloud easier than with other platforms. There haven't been any problems while using it during my three-month internship.

A very minor improvement would be to simplify the instructions on setting a trigger, as I had to read through them multiple times at the start.

I have used AWS Lambda for three months.

AWS Lambda is entirely stable. I never encountered any issues while using it.

I haven't used it extensively, however, it seems scalable. During my internship, scalability hasn't been critical to what I've used it for.

I have never needed to communicate with technical support for AWS Lambda.

Positive

The initial setup was extremely easy. AWS Lambda is significantly easier compared to other IDEs or Visual Studio Code.

There is no specific advice I can provide at the moment because I've only done a short internship. Overall, I would rate AWS Lambda a ten out of ten.

Public Cloud

We have used Lambda for

batch processing for specific schedules.

different bot functions that run regularly,

Application business logic

Easy to impliment without any environment provisioning

 The initial setup is straightforward. 

The stability is good.

It has good monitoring. the visibility is great.

From a very high-level perspective, it is a good solution, however, there are certain limitations. This becomes challenging for us. Specifically, a limitation is Lambda cannot continuously execute for more than 15 minutes. That could be one limitation. On an implementation level, there are certain limitations that I know about yet would not be the best person to explain as I am not technical.

The execution timeout can be increased so that if we have a lengthy process, it will not fail before their timeouts. We've had to revamp the way that it works due to that 15-minute timeout limitation.

We've been using over 2 years

It's very stable, and it's easy to monitor. They have all the required logs and dashboards available on AWS to see the progress. The visibility of it also is good when a Lambda runs and completes.

I would not say it's scalable in terms of usage. As the demands increase it is scalable. But if the lambda need more time to process it's not scalable beyond 15 mts.

I've never dealt with technical support. I can't comment on their services. 

Positive

It seems to be a straightforward process. However, I'm not directly totally involved with the Lambda implementation.

We are implementors and can set up the solution for clients. 

The ROI is very good. It's a positive thing as there's no investment at all. It's purely on usage you have to pay. There's no upfront investment required, and it's only on the requirement that you have to choose Lambda. With the cost not being very big, the ROI is very good.

The cost is based on the number of Lambdas used if I'm not mistaken. It's only a usage charge, not a license charge.

We are an extensively using

I'd recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

With time-out limitation, it's not a perfect fit for the batch process which takes more than 10 min.

Public Cloud

In our organization, we have a huge number of users using Lambda, approximately around 100. We are using Lambda based on several considerations like costs, and scalability and it provides us with high availability and scalability in our processes.

Lambda being serverless is a great feature that is appropriate for our use cases.

Memory limitation is one of the weaknesses of AWS Lambda and as a result, we have to use several Lambda, instead of just one.

Recently, I met with an Amazon employee, who is responsible for Lambda as a product. It appears Amazon has some plans with Lambda, so I don’t have to add something to the additional features.

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

I would rate the stability eight out of ten because of certain bugs in the solution.

 I would rate the scalability eight out of ten because we have certain limitations in terms of memory and size. I see it as a gradual shift of mindset rather than limitation, where AWS Lambda is trying to incorporate everything according to the industry standards, which is everything is domain-driven design and suppression of microservices. Some people even have issues with the User Interface (UI).

We have a special collaboration with AWS, so we have regular meetings with AWS and Amazon, to report issues and they further report it to the concerned team. We have meetings, face-to-face and evaluation meetings with them and their solution engineers.

Positive

We previously used Azure and Volvo

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I implemented the solution  by myself because I was once a tech lead. 

I think the price is okay. However, if they add more functionality, they can have better prices. In fact, they should have better and more flexible packages for clients who have greater consumption of Lambda.    

I would rate six out of ten overall for AWS Lambda and all the Lambda solutions,. Because we don’t have the solution for each of our use cases. It is not available in various aspects and sometimes, it is not suitable.

Public Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We are using the solution for creating the functionality. We store files over S3 and trigger that functionality to deploy our application. We use the solution for serverless activity. Once we store the files inside our S3 bucket, we write specific scripts in Lambda for auto-configuration. Afterward, whenever we send any data inside the S3, it gets automatically picked and deployed in the particular server.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to work as a serverless application.

They should work on the solution's stability and pricing.

We have been using the solution for a year.

It is averagely stable.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability as a five.

The initial setup took work. I have worked on the development activity of the solution. The cloud architect of the solution needs to learn Python programming, like coding activities, to update new scripts inside Lambda. It requires a team for the process. I came across some issues during the deployment process and was able to fix them within an hour. So, fixing the problems after raising a ticket while deploying the solution takes time. I rate the setup process as two or three for a medium-level expert. Further, I rate the process as a nine for an executive with knowledge of Python programming. If everything works well, it takes 45 minutes to deploy the solution.

We took help from an Integrator to implement the solution. We were a team of a business analyst, DevOps engineers, and one developer working on the setup. We looped in another person in case we faced any issues.

The solution's price is average, and I rate it as a five for pricing.

The solution doesn't require any maintenance if you are creating an instance on your own. In case of any issues with Lambda services, you can check with their AWS support team. Also, they have provided a support portal inside the dashboard. You can ask for their help. 

AWS Lambda is a good solution. If you are well versed with Linux, AWS will be more accessible. I rate the solution as an eight out of ten.

Private Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)