AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

There a variety of use cases for this solution but it is mostly used for data processing type transformations from one source to a target. In instances when Lambda works well, we are planning to increase usage. 

Deployment and maintenance of Lambda requires two people but this may increase depending on the size of the deployment.

Lambda has improved our organization by making it possible to transform data.

Lambda has limitations on the amount of memory you can use and is not a good solution for long running processes. If the amount of data is reasonably small, it will run and transform successfully. If you have tons of data coming in, it stops working and you have to restart it.

The orchestration and coordination between different Lambdas could also be improved.

I have used this solution or a couple of years.

This is a fairly stable solution. 

This solution has some limitations on scalability due to the problem with coordination between the different Lambdas. Is it not very straightforward and you have to do a lot of testing.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward.

I would advise others to use it in those circumstances where it works well and to be aware of the problems with coordination and orchestration. Make sure that it doesn't have to process tons of data.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

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.

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. 

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.

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.

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. 

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.