We have a DNS as a service and NAS as a service, which integrates, and we use Lambda functions there. We have a lot of applications that we use Lambda for.
This solution is cloud-based.
We have a DNS as a service and NAS as a service, which integrates, and we use Lambda functions there. We have a lot of applications that we use Lambda for.
This solution is cloud-based.
Some of the most valuable features are that it's easy to install and use. The performance is also good.
Lambda could be improved in the sense that some of the things done with Lambda function take some time. So the performance could be better and faster.
I have been using Lambda for many years.
This solution is stable.
This solution is scalable.
I think, eventually, we will increase our usage. We need to move some of our services to Lambda.
Amazon's technical support is good.
Before implementing Lambda, we had legacy types of solutions.
The installation could be faster, but I believe it's a straightforward process. I manage a team that handles the installation, so I can't comment on the specifics of the installation process. Within the team that handles maintenance and deployment, we have two engineers.
We implemented this solution through an in-house team.
We don't need to pay for licensing to use Lambda.
I rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten. I would recommend AWS Lambda to others. We provide a lot of services, part of which is that we write Lambda functions.
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.
My primary use case for this solution is usually for event-driven architecture. Since it's AWS, it's cloud-based.
I have found all of the features valuable. It's an easy and cheap solution.
AWS Lambda could be improved by increasing the size of the payload. Also, sometimes Lambda doesn't implement well for bigger solutions.
I have been using this solution for three years.
This solution is stable.
I would rate customer support a nine out of ten. I have made three or four service requests and those were all resolved within 24 hours.
I didn't use a different solution before implementing Lambda.
The installation is straightforward. There isn't really anything you need to do. If you know exactly what you want, it can be done in five minutes.
I implemented this solution myself.
I pay for a monthly license. The licensing options will depend on the users. There's a monthly option and a yearly option.
Lambda is a good and cheap solution and I would recommend it to those without a huge payload. There are around twenty or thirty people using Lambda in my organization.
I would rate this solution an eight 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 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 primary use case is processing data. We use the pipeline multiple places to process the data. Whatever JSON files we get, we have to standardize, enrich, and also format to the application.
The most valuable feature is that it's serverless. Therefore, server configuration is not required, and we can run it directly anywhere. We can write Java code or Python code in that.
The initial setup is straightforward as well.
AWS Lambda is good for short-term automation processes.
If you want to run processing data, which takes less than 15 minutes, then you can use Lambda. However, if it is a specific ETL process or a long-term one, then AWS Lambda is not a good option.
The longer Lambda runs, the higher is the cost incurred because the cost is based on runtime.
At times, it hard to know when Lambda should be used and when it should not. So in the future, if there are serverless extensions, it would be fine.
I've been working with AWS Lambda for six to seven months.
The initial setup of AWS Lambda is straightforward.
The cost of AWS Lambda is based on runtime.
It's a good product, and we use Lambda for short run processes, for example, processing a file from the landing zone. Suppose FTP or SFTP has put a file in one landing area, and we have to push a file to the S3 bucket. We would not need to do any writing, shell scripting, or Linux coding, etc. In general, with Lambda you can get the Python coder or Java code.
So, professionals can easily perform these tasks within a short time. This will help with agile processes and sprints. My advice is that AWS Lambda is a good service for short-term automation processes.
I would rate AWS Lambda at eight on a scale from one to ten.
AWS Lambda enables server-less architecture for seamless orchestration. We use the solution for various orchestrations. This is very useful when you would need to perform orchestrations of the different applications together. Many organisations are using this solution for web and mobile applications at scale.
The main features of this solution are the ability to integrate multiple AWS applications or external applications very quickly and organize all of them by leveraging server-less computing power of AWS. Additionally, it is easy to use and you can run various programming languages, such as Python, Go, and Java.
There is room for improvement in user-friendliness. When comparing this solution to others it is not as user-friendly.
We have been using this solution for over five years for various server-less computing on AWS. My current employer has pioneered on this technology and serving various global clients for years.
This solution is a serverless architecture in which you do not have to manage any infrastructure which makes it very stable.
The solution is highly scalable.
We have plans to increase usage because most of the workload and applications are using this solution.
The technical support is managed by AWS which is good.
Azure Logic App & Function App, Google Pub-Sub etc.
Managed by AWS
The price of the solution is reasonable and it is a pay-per-use model. It is very good for cost optimization.
I would recommend this solution to others. If you are with AWS it is better to use the serverless architecture.
I would rate AWS Lambda a nine out of ten.
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.
