AWS Lambda Reviews

We are primarily using AWS Lambda for real-time API services. We use AWS Redshift to support our Lambda code functions. 

This solution is cloud-based. 

One of the most valuable features of AWS Lambda is the performance. Lambda is very technical and has very high performance, as well as good real-time performance. 

AWS Lambda could be improved with better stability. 

I have been using AWS Lambda for more than two years. 

This solution is very, very stable. 

In our organization, there are around 300 users of AWS Lambda. We have plans to increase our usage. 

I have contacted Amazon's technical support, and they were very excellent. 

The installation is straightforward. The process took us under three hours, and we did it ourselves. For deployment and maintenance, we have a team of 10 engineers and developers. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. 

For licensing, we pay a yearly subscription. 

I rate AWS Lambda a nine out of ten. To those looking to implement AWS Lambda, I would recommend this solution, and say that Lambda has a learning curve in order to enhance the service when using it for the first time. I would advise the user to study hard to use Lambda as a tool.

We use it for serverless functions.

The programming language and the integration with other AWS services are the most valuable features.

Its performance can be improved. There should also be more dynamic security permissions.

I have been using this solution since I joined this company, which was two years ago.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable.

There are no issues. So far, I am completely satisfied with their technical support.

It was easy.

I did it myself.

We didn't evaluate other options because it was a requirement for the project.

I would advise others to predefine the main model and ensure their CI/CD pipeline.

I am satisfied with Lambda, and I would recommend it to others. I would rate it an eight out of 10.

We use AWS Lambda for several things. We are using it, for instance, to do authentication of information from HTTP sites. We use it for alerting when monitoring the direct database infrastructure, and we use it for API transformation.

It provides us with everything that we need.

We have been using AWS Lambda for two or three years.

We don't have a problem with the stability of AWS Lambda. It's very stable.

It is a scalable solution.

We have many users, but it is based on volume and the number of transactions, not by the number of users.

We have no issues with the technical support.

We use a number of AWS services.

The installation is straightforward. 

We have scripted most of the things. There was no problem with the installation.

We completed the installation ourselves.

The price in general could always be better.

The fees are volume-based.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate AWS Lambda a nine out of ten.

Lambda can be used for automating AWS resources. 

It can also be used for automation outside of the cloud and for serverless applications. With Lambda, you can apply the code directly. 

The stability of the solution is very good, as is the performance.

It's a brilliant Amazon service that provides for many use cases. It's quite flexible.

The product has been very easy to use. All you have to do is configure a Lambda function and then deploy your code directly there and then you can invoke it in different ways. 

It is easy to configure.

The initial setup is very straightforward. 

Technical support has been great in general.

It would be ideal if we could use the solution across different platforms.

The integration could be better.

I've been using the solution for three years at this point. 

The solution is stable and the performance is great. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We have multiple applications. Most of our applications are Lambda-based, I would say there are around a hundred at this point.

The technical support on offer is brilliant. There shouldn't be any concern with contacting them. they are helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of service on offer from them.

We have found that the solution is easy to install. You just have to do it through the UI and you can easily configure it and deploy it directly.

For deployment, et cetera, we just need one cloud ops engineer per day.

I was able to handle the implementation myself. I did not need the assistance of any consultants or integrators. Individual users should be okay if they want to install it themselves. 

We don't need to worry about monthly or yearly licenses. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been very pleased with its capabilities in general.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

We have two or three applications that are hosted with Lambda. Being on cloud, the solution has its own advantages with good management of resources. You can spin up anything instantly without any investment and disaster recovery or HA is taken care of by the service itself. 

I believe Lambda security needs to be improved.  

I've been using this solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. 

I'm satisfied with the technical support, they respond quickly. 

The initial setup was straightforward and we currently have four engineers working on the product. 

Licensing is on a monthly subscription model and is usage-based. 

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution for our backup coding for one of the ABDI services. We had a big job for the callout function, therefore we implemented Lambda here.

Lambda is the function we need to deploy any code.

We like that we don't require any infrastructure for it, which allows us a lot of cost savings.  

The solution has the capability to scale.

The product is quite stable.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

We've found the technical support to be very helpful.

It's a fairly easy solution to learn.

I can't recall any features that might be lacking. For us, it works quite well, however, it depends on what a company needs.

We'd love to see more integration potential in the future.

I've been using the solution for about two years at this point.

The solution has proven to be very reliable and quite stable. The performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze on us. 

The product scales well. If a company needs to expand, it should be possible to do so.

We have more than 5,000 users on the solution currently.

Technical support from Amazon is excellent. They are extremely helpful and we find they respond quickly. We're very happy with the level of support we receive. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not overly difficult by any means. Ashish:
The Lambda function is not that hard to set up due to the fact that we generally go to the AWS services URL and we can easily find the Lambda function from there.

The solution really doesn't require that much maintenance. You don't need a big team on it at all.

The solution is fairly reasonable, and, as it doesn't require any infrastructure, can save a company a lot of money simply by being on the cloud.

We bought a license from AWS that renews yearly.

We're using the latest version of the solution. It automatically updates as it is based on the cloud.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We are quite happy with its overall capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution to other users and other organizations. It's very easy to learn.

The product serves as a function as a service, a serverless environment, you can say. It's a serverless environment, or, as some people call it, function as a service, FaaS.

We have been using it as a mobile backend. We have a mobile frontend, a mobile application, which uses the AWS Lambda functions running in the cloud. It serves as an API backend for a mobile application that is running in the frontend.

The solution is highly scalable.

The solution has proven itself to be stable.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We've found the cost to be very good. It would be a great option for startups due to the low pricing.

The solution is very mature.

The user-friendliness of the solution could be improved. If it was easy to run with the same function in other platforms, other environments, that would make it more portable. That would be really good. User-friendliness and portability will be the two factors that need the most improvement.

The startup time sometimes needs to be faster, so that is one area of improvement. The startup time of each function can be slow. When it works the first time, it takes a little bit of time, so there's a minor delay. That could be improved.

The support of additional languages would improve the solution.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is pretty mature by now. It's been there for a few years with AWS and they're continuously improving it. It's pretty mature. The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is highly scalable and also very cost-efficient. You only pay for the time, the duration of time and that's in maybe seconds, microseconds. You pay very little until you have very large-scale users. It is ideal for startups who want to deploy applications on the cloud.

While internally only our developers really use the solution, the mobile application is used by thousands of users globally.

We do plan to increase usage and will be adding more functions to our application.

While something was used before, it likely wasn't serverless. 

I'm aware that Oracle and Azure have certain options available.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward. 

The deployment times vary. It really depends on what you need to deploy.

Our developers managed the implementation process. A consultant or outside integrator was not required. It was all handled in-house.

The solution is very cost-efficient.

We are using the latest version of the solution currently. I cannot say which version number it is. I don't know it off-hand.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with the capabilities so far.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations. This is much better than the other serverless solutions.

AWS Lambda has serverless programming, like Logic Apps from Azure. You just configure the run-time and then they start coding. It is event-driven. It started with my obtaining Salesforce. Salesforce is a low-code and non-code program and totally SAS. Everything starts from the event, from the trigger. You get the trigger and you work at the program. You have some other models, maybe faster or fancier models. But in my opinion, this kind of program is started by locating the system and identifying where the trigger and entry point of the program are. Then you get the full advantage of the program. You don't need to worry about any infrastructure.

I think this is the future. Compared with the EC2, you don't have to pay anything if you don't run it. Otherwise, with EC2 when our client provisions the system and the instances, you always have to pay. There are other tremendous advantages, like flexibility. After you provision EC2 you can write something that does not totally follow the cloud convention. You use it to provision the container. With the program you need to have those 10 principles of cloud computing. Especially recently, within the past four or five years, I have gotten away from DevOps, or the software development life cycle. Even though I researched the product portfolio from DevOps and then the life cycle for DevOps, I try to position myself as an architect with hands-on experience.

In my opinion, Lambda is very similar to Salesforce, which is the original for the SaaS platform and is an extremely low-code environment. With Microsoft and AWS you can say, "Okay. You can choose whatever language you need to make it even more flexible." 

Everything is the cloud. Lambda is a fully managed service. If you want to do it either as a private cloud or on-premise, I'm sure you can do that, too. But I don't know how to manage the pricing structure. But then you've lost the point of Lambda because if you do not use it, you do not pay. Again, I just want to emphasize, I'm not a Lambda expert. But, logically thinking, the big advantage of serverless programming for the customer is that you just use it and pay. Pay and go. You don't need to provision anything.

All my experience with AWS Azure is on the public cloud. We do not get too deep. In IBM we do. When we do sales training we always get the private cloud on-premise. There are many reasons for this. One reason is that IBM lost the battle for the public cloud so we get into it much deeper. We go to the enterprise and we can deploy programs to your data center and offices. But for the tech data for AWS and Azure, we are all using the public cloud as a showcase when we talk to the customer and to the retailer.

The number one feature with AWS Lambda is that it is fully managed. From the developer's perspective, you get the coding much more easily. Now many situations are not using code. You plug in, assemble it, and configure it. Lambda makes it low-code. I come from being a Java certified developer for 15 years. You configure the environment for deployment just like in DevOps. That was always the most challenging part as a developer. You identified when to trigger it. If the program can't facilitate it, then 80% is gone. With 20% you just Lose Syntax. You can use Lose Syntax with any programming language as a reference finding out the variables, the statements, the loop, and what other kinds of things you can do. Just follow that to where you can plot it into your business system. 

They might think to have the business benefits say, "Hey, if you don't like it, no need to pay." So, potentially, you can save. If the future is going to be serverless, that's what I think the future of something like Salesforce will be. Programming is getting much easier and does not need a lot of configuration because step-by-step abstraction starts from the infrastructure service. You can replace your hardware, but you still need to do a lot of things in the abstract. The environment now is totally fully managed. I'm not sure if we're totally aligned there. I always talk against those aspects in the Salesforce situation. But I believe Lambda is a comparable peer, apples to apples.

I can only speak from the user experience. Salesforce integrates SharesPost efficiently. How? They say, "Okay, I invented another language called Apex. Forget about anything else. This is my language." The benefit of this language is that everything is simplified. Your system is super easy to maintain. But AWS then assures you that they are flexible, that they have a collection of 10 or 20 languages, and you just choose your environment and range. That's the reason I appreciate Salesforce. They always make things easier. They have their loop reasoning because they are a different kind of company. Microsoft and AWS really get the full spec. They want to own the business. But Salesforce data wants the simplest way.

So, this is my understanding and unique experience.

I think that perhaps Lambda could explore its functionality more.

I have been using AWS Lambda for a few months.

I didn't explore enough information to evaluate that.

I didn't experience the scalability personally, only from my reading. Amazon takes care of the scalability. That's the right way. It's automatic and it's fully managed. That's one benefit of Lambda.

We have all kinds and sizes of resellers. There are large enterprises and small businesses. It's different. And some of them are product based, they are creating their own products. Some of them are consultant based. It's really different. Tech data is different vs. a business model.

I contacted support many times. My experience was very little and I just saw how Lambda was working, to try to understand if it is okay.

I don't actually use AWS Lambda. I'm a distributor. I try to explain solutions to the vendor. I previously used Salesforce Apex. I use the Azure Logic App service.

Salesforce does not have so many options to choose from, such as Java or C++. Salesforce said, lets invent a language. They call it "invent" but actually they just made a simplified edition of Java and eliminated a lot of complex features. Now all the syntax is the same. Salesforce is a business company. They focus on business solutions development and they make the customer's lifecycle development simple. AWS really does not stick to any business because they are a technology company.

Let me explain the similar things that Lambda has to Salesforce. When you get the event you have to see our form. With the sales approval process, if you have the 50% to get to the half million and above, you need the vice president to get the approval. You can use this trigger based serverless program. All you want to do is to write down the logic and then put it under the trigger of whenever a certain number changes in the half billion, and then you need to do the multiple steps.

This kind of programming is easily defined in the business. All you need to do is get the logic done, get it tested, see the steps you are doing, and then fix up the errors. As for Lambda, as I said, I've just experienced two very simple examples in the AWS, but they were the same thing.

Logic App and Lambda should be doing the same thing - fully managed coding. You focus on the logic triggered by the certain events. And there are other additions within the Lambda family. It can be scheduled as a batch job. I don't think it's originally lack of motivation from the serverless. The serverless is from the trigger.

The initial setup is straightforward. If you follow a 30 or 45 minute lab, it seems pretty clear.

Everybody should check out AWS Lambda. That's why I didn't explore much and it was at the top of my list. This is a fully managed model. The number one. This is for the future. In the future, many of the EC2 applications may be replaced by Lambda. If I started something from scratch, I would try to use Lambda. It's much simpler. It can simplify a lot. If you add the scalability into the picture, it could have 80% or 90% of the complexity. They are very important. All the servlets are very important from a cloud computing perspective.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate AWS Lambda an eight.

I am a fan of the no-code, low-code if you consistently improve to make it even simpler. Maybe they could do something to simplify the language. I'm not sure if Lambda has the code for the Microsoft Logic App, which means they can eliminate most of the code and everything becomes drag and a drop. Because they eliminated those "if errors." They have those kinds of functions. I think mostly because I have not explored the whole portfolio of AWS. I believe there is a full suite of them.

I believe their full suite of the service is complemented with Lambda. But I do believe the competition is going to make it simple with low-code, no-code. There is no-code, low-code and also no infrastructure. That is going to be the key. Also, maybe you can have the Lambda ecosystem and have some component of the module built above the Lambda so that people can make graphing and plotting even easier. This is not just any software, you get the module there which is much better. But AWS is big enough to neutralize the ecosystem. I believe it will come but the people don't have the patience to start from scratch these days.

We are a startup, and we are doing faster and cheaper storage for IT. We are going to offer our storage services in about two months, and we are starting with AWS. We do lossless compression using microservices. We do the compute in a lossless compression way similar to gzip, WinZip, or PKZIP, except that we are giving a discount to customers.

The product that we are developing is not yet in the market. We are doing alpha testing for select customers who are using AWS. The biggest advantage is that you get faster storage without doing a forklift upgrade, and you get 35% cheaper storage. So, you get 2X faster storage with a 35% to 50% lower monthly bill.

We use AWS Lambda to encode and decode data. I work on the encode and decode software. I am working with a cloud developer. He works on the Lambda deliverable and wraps my C code with his C++ wrappers. They get bundled together with no JS stuff.

The cool thing about AWS Lambda is that AWS does all the management. For compression, it is all about making the data small and then making it regular size again. We have an encode function and a decode function. AWS Lambda schedules each of those for us. It has a load balancer and all the fancy stuff, depending on the demand.

The most valuable part of AWS Lambda is that I only need to write the software. I need to write two functions, and my cloud developer turns them into two AWS Lambda instances. That's it.

One area of improvement is to include support for more programming languages. AWS Lambda does not support a lot of programming languages. You have to write the Lambda functions in a certain programming language. We are using C++. My developer knows a couple of other languages. Python is his favorite language, but Python is not supported in AWS Lambda.

I have been using AWS Lambda since it came out in 2016.

It is very stable.

Its scalability is great. We write an encode function, and my cloud developer turns that into an AWS Lambda instance. We then write a decode function, and he turns it into another AWS Lambda instance. We just hook it up and use an API gateway for doing the security check, encryption, and other things.

We did not require any support. Most of the stuff in the cloud is anyways self-serve.

The initial setup was straightforward.

They have a program for AWS customers called Activate. With the Activate program, you can get compute and storage credits. They gave us like $10,000 worth of credit over 18 months.

I would recommend using this solution. It was the first microservice. It doesn't have much overhead, and it does what it claims to do. 

I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten. It is a good solution.

We had to deploy some serverless Node.js applications.

The solution works for small applications. It is a serverless tool that is quick to spin up. We needn’t consider anything in the bag.

I want to see support for longer applications. I need the 15-minute time-out window to improve.

I have been using the solution for about two to three years.

The tool is stable and you can rely on it for production service.

I think there were no issues with the size of the application we used, so I didn't see any noticeable scaling issues with Lambda. It's overall a good service.

The tech support is always good but it depends on the type of plan. We use the enterprise support plan which offers quick responses.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward.

I would rate the tool’s pricing a nine out of ten. The solution’s pricing works on a pay-as-you-go basis.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.