AWS Lambda Reviews

We have one or two use cases for real-time file processing. We use the event triggers to detect file arrival.

AWS Lambda is serverless. It is quick to deploy. The event-driven execution model has improved the project efficiency because it is quick and easy to deploy. However, it also introduced a set of new problems. It is the industry traction ever since the network went fully API.

Since the tool is serverless and it is hosted in the cloud, we do not need an initial capital investment on servers. We can pay as we use. We have integrated the product with other AWS services. We use SNS and SQL. There is an offering from AWS for integrated solutions.

We face some problems with the event-driven execution model.

The tool is very stable. There are certain things that we have to do to support it, but once we cross the t's and dot the i’s, it works.

The initial setup seems to be very straightforward.

I will recommend the solution to others for serverless computing needs. It’s a quick delivery. We do not have to set up servers before we start deploying. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use it primarily for image resizing in batch and scheduled jobs. Additionally, one of our clients relies on Lambda for running a continuously active custom API, handling their ongoing API requests.

Leveraging it to run containers directly from Amazon Elastic Container Registry has proven to be highly valuable. The utilization of containers is particularly beneficial in overcoming the size limitations imposed on Lambda functions which not only allows us to work around these constraints but also contributes to the improvement and maintenance of our code.

There's room for improvement in the testing setup. Attempting to test it through the AWS CLI also posed issues, and when trying to test the Lambda function on my local machine, I encountered difficulties in obtaining comprehensive logs or error messages to diagnose what might be going wrong.

I have been working with it for one year.

It provides a high level of stability, and I have not encountered any issues so far. The system demonstrated stability whenever we attempted to update the function or perform any operations. Responses consistently aligned with the timeframes specified on the AWS website, remaining within the service level agreement. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The scalability is notably high, I would rate it nine out of ten. Approximately sixty percent of my clients are utilizing this approach. While I serve two major organizations, the majority of my clientele consists of small and medium-sized businesses.

The technical support from Amazon has been excellent, and I've consistently had positive experiences. During a customer migration from another cloud provider to AWS, the entire technical team provided valuable insights and enhanced the architecture. Their assistance not only improved the overall design but also ensured smooth transition and support. Even for minor issues, the response times have consistently exceeded the expectations stated on the website. For instance, if a 24-hour response time is indicated, they typically respond within twelve hours. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup around seven out of ten. While it wasn't overly challenging, it did demand a certain level of technical proficiency. Someone without substantial technical knowledge might find it less straightforward to set up.

In our container-based approach, we initiated by constructing containers on the local developer machine, then we pushed these containers to AWS Elastic Container Repository. Following this, we established a Lambda function that utilized the uploaded ECR image, allowing it to execute the associated container. Additionally, we incrementally built services to utilize those containers at Lambda functions. The deployment took less than three hours.

The pricing varies based on the specific solution you're implementing, and in comparison to the value it provides, the overall cost is reasonable. When used appropriately for its intended purpose, the price is relatively low. However, if Lambda is employed outside its intended scope, the cost can escalate exponentially. I would rate it four out of ten.

I recommend thoroughly reading the documentation to determine if it is a suitable solution for your specific use case. It's essential to understand the nuances of your use case before proceeding with the implementation. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

My prior company used the solution to perform event-based actions and notifications, process data in an S3 bucket, and send messages in the SQS queue. 

Our development team worked with 300 users across different departments to integrate the solution. 

The serverless format is a benefit because on-demand computing can be performed without having to run machines.

The solution integrates well with API gateways and S3 events via its AWS ecosystem. 

The solution works with various programming languages including .NET and Java. 

The solution should continue to streamline integrations with AWS services. 

At one point, there was an issue receiving support for a new version. Support was behind by two versions and this presented challenges, but they caught up over time. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The solution is scalable for users because it is serverless. You can provision IAM users and easily give them access.

We scaled a core from one million to ten millions runs with no issues.  

I never needed to contact support. 

The setup is very easy and onboarding happens quickly. 

We implemented the solution in-house.

Implementation includes determining which APS you need, writing code, and packaging it all for upload. There is no real deployment other than adding the package to your CI/CD pipeline and pushing it. We do not consider this work to be substantial. 

The operational push takes a matter of minutes. 

The ROI is definitely worthwhile because pricing is based on use. 

The pricing is on-demand and based on runs or times that are billed out monthly. 

For example, one million requests might cost 20 cents. 

Our company wanted to compute in an ad-hoc manner. The solution allowed us to schedule cron jobs which made things easier. 

The solution also integrates well with the AWS suite of products so can be used with an API gateway and S3 functions. 

The solution can be used for many scenarios encountered by IT developers. There is a general push to create serverless systems that have on-demand use and price models. For most use cases, there is a 50% chance the solution will be a good fit.  

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for integration purposes. We use it very closely with Jira, for example. 

The workflow is the best thing about the product. When the integration happened and from where to where is something we can see automatically and navigate the workflow. 

From Jira to AWS Lambda, we're sending data. When we go from Jira to AWS, through webhooks, we are sending data to the Lambda function. From Lambda, they're navigating Jira. Whenever the manual rework is done, they need to perform some job bundles from the AWS to the Jira only. They can operate from Jira to AWS and AWS to Jira, which is great.

The initial setup is pretty easy. 

I don't have much experience after six months. I can't speak to the pros and cons. 

I have seen some drawbacks with certain integrations. 

I started using the solution six months ago. 

I'm not aware of any issues with stability. It's been issue-free so far. 

The solution can scale. We can add more users to it. We have ten to 15 people on the product right now. They are developers. 

I've never needed to reach out to technical support. I haven't had any issues. I can't, therefore, speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We found the setup to be straightforward. It's not complicated at all. 

It took me one day to get everything up and running.

I'm not aware of the exact pricing. I don't handle any licensing. 

Our company is looking into ServiceNow to see how it handles integrations. 

We are a customer and end-user. We use the cloud for integration purposes. 

I'm not completely into AWS Lambda just yet. What I can say, integration-wise, Lambda does not require any username or password from the Jira once they start talking to each other. It's integrated very well. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It is a very new tool for me; I need to do some more research on it to really understand it fully.

AWS Lambda is used only by the DevOps team. I can use the solution to configure and set up all the requirements for testing the application and test code.

AWS Lambda should improve its compatibility with the language used to write the code. I would like to be able to choose a different language to code in AWS Lambda.

I have been using AWS Lambda for six months.

Around 15 to 20 users work with AWS Lambda in our organization. The solution is used by different teams, including the DevOps, testing, and development teams.

I faced some challenges when we worked on the migration. I raised tickets to the support team, and they helped me.

The solution's initial setup can be done with the help of documents.

AWS Lambda is not expensive for micro testing but is expensive if used for long deployment or long services.

It is not difficult for a beginner to learn to use AWS Lambda for the first time because it has good documentation.

Overall, I rate the solution a five 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.

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.

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.