AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

We're using AWS Lambda to trigger jobs and receive SQS messages. We're also using the tool as a single unit where you have computing, storage, and network.

AWS Lambda has improved my company through its usage in a distributed system, particularly event-driven architecture. When an event is passed to AWS Lambda from Amazon SQS asynchronously, the tool can call an ETL job, and it can trigger that job, and that job can trigger an AWS Lambda function, which can then send a message to the queue to complete the entire use case.

The most valuable feature of AWS Lambda is that you can trigger and run jobs instantly, and after you complete the job, that function is either destroyed or stopped.

The feature to attach external storage, such as an S3 or elastic storage, must be added to AWS Lambda. This is its area for improvement.

I've been using AWS Lambda for two years.

Stability-wise, AWS Lambda is an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, AWS Lambda is an eight out of ten.

I have not encountered any problems with AWS Lambda, so I didn't need to contact its technical support team.

We didn't use a different solution apart from AWS Lambda.

The initial setup for AWS Lambda was straightforward.

I saw ROI from AWS Lambda.

Price-wise, AWS Lambda is a five out of ten.

One person is enough for maintenance for a cloud-based tool, such as AWS Lambda.

I cannot share the number of AWS Lambda direct users in my company, as that figure is confidential.

My advice to others looking into implementing the tool is that it's easy to use as long as you know the basics.

AWS Lambda has good features, so I'm giving it an eight out of ten.

We use AWS Lambda extensively for our maintenance work, for our products, and in our daily actions. We try to move some data based on alerts in certain situations and events. For example, if we are using queues based on the queue methods, we prefer to trigger different Lambdas for different functions (to enable some functionality across products). There are also a few Lambdas for audits. There are a few Lambdas for backups and many other use cases. 

I like that it's easy to use and maintain. Lambda is good and supports different platforms, so you don't need to worry about language or maintenance.

The execution time could be better. One of the major limitations is the time period because it doesn't give you more than seven minutes. So, before thinking about Lambda, you should think through your use case and ensure it's a good fit. Otherwise, you can use batch, step functions, or other methods. 

Reports and the monitoring board could also be improved in terms of alerts. The threshold alerts are there but can be improved. It takes some time to get used to these methods and get the hang of them. 

I have been using AWS Lambda for about five years.

AWS Lambda is pretty stable.

AWS Lambda is scalable. There are some concurrency issues where threshold values play a role. We might end up making a request to increase those threshold values or the limit quota, but otherwise, it's pretty decent.

AWS Lambda tech support is pretty decent. 

On a scale from one to five, I would give AWS Lambda tech support a four.

Positive

The initial setup is more about usage. Implementing this solution takes about 15 minutes, but the code and debugging will take some time. Two or three people can manage and maintain this solution.

On a scale from one to five, I would give the initial setup a five.

AWS Lambda cost is pretty decent. 

I recommend this solution to new users as this tool simplifies mundane tasks and achieves a few things between the two systems.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give AWS Lambda an eight.

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 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. 

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 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.

Our primary use case is for our financial institutions. We use it for many customers that we work with. We develop solutions for our customers and run them on AWS. We wanted to build the solution on the public cloud and out of all the public cloud providers, AWS is the best. It has a rich set of services. 

It's a serverless solution which is the best feature. It helps us because it offers free aspects. From the infrastructure perspective, it helps us manage costs. There is no overhead of estimating how much infrastructure we're going to need. We can focus on building the business functionality that we want to build. 

Lambda didn't use to support all the capabilities, if you wanted to initialize it before started serving the requests, it is not possible. In the most recent upgrades, they have added this feature. There is nothing missing. If there is something missing, AWS has other solutions that covers it. I look at Lambda as a piece of AWS, working in conjunction with other solutions.  

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

We don't have any issues with stability or scalability. We have offline and online users. There are thousands of online users. 

Their support is excellent. We have no complaints. It can be expensive, we bought the enterprise support. If you don't want to spend the money, you might run into issues but that isn't the case for us. 

Everything was set up in the public cloud. We didn't need to set up a lot of things. We didn't have to connect a lot of connectivities to external applications. If you are setting it up on hybrid solution, there is a lot of work that needs to go in. You need to understand what your organization's security standards are, how the different teams are going to access the infrastructure, etc. For hybrid, it will take a lot of time but for only the public cloud, it is quite easy. 

AWS is slightly more expensive than Azure. But from a maturity perspective, AWS is way more ahead than Azure. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten. It was missing features like initialization but they are available now in the latest release. 

It is good for smaller companies that don't have a lot of staff that will manage the infrastructure. It automatically scales based on the users and allocating the resources. From a cost perspective, it is quite cheap. It takes out a lot of overhead. If it's for a large company with a lot of experts, there are other good solutions.