AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

In respect of the function and template, I find the solution to be easy to use, as it obviates the need to do the same thing repeatedly. 

The automation with other Amazon products could be better. 

As the solution is on-cloud, it is already scalable. 

There is another local team with whom we work when it comes to the need for technical support. 

The installation and configuration of the solution is straightforward. 

The length of the deployment can vary with the solution. It took us half a day but, when accounting for the configurations and connectivity, all told, this can take about one or two days. 

The cloud team consists of 47 people. 

The solution is deployed on-cloud. 

In the past year, we have around 75 to 80 Lambda functions. 

The solution provides basic security standards.

I would recommend the solution to others. 

I rate AWS Lambda as a five to six out of ten. 

We use AWS Lambda to automatically manages some compute resources.

It triggers and screens some of my services.

It is easy to use.

I like the way it manages.

I would like to see more integration with other platforms.

I have been using AWS Lambda for a few years.

We are not using the latest version.

AWS Lambda is a stable solution.

You do not have to scale AWS Lambda, it automatically scales for you.

AWS Lambda is used on a daily basis.

We only have a few people who used this solution. I have two teams.

We have a dedicated manager.

My experience with support so far has been good.

It doesn't require any installation at all.

AWS Lambda is inexpensive.

I am very happy with this solution. I would recommend it to others who are interested in it.

I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten.

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.

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. 

The product is primarily used to deploy code and provision a software solution to your clients when they don't have the time. You don't have to pay for the servers and the uptime.

It is my preferred product, as it provides me with source code within the solution.

It's a great product due to the fact that you don't have to pay for the servers and the uptime.

The solution is very stable.

The product scales well. 

The solution can be free to use.

The product could make the process of integration easier. 

The could be more integration testing. The internal is great with Lambda, however, I have to make sure I have done my tests on a related machine before deploying.

I've been using the solution for three years. I haven't used it for too long just yet.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It does not crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution scales very well. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

Its scalability is always based on how much software there is. It's actually virtually building out. The API can scale up automatically. And if the API calls go down, then the system slows in real-time.

All my clients are using the product. All the projects I push to my clients are on Lambda.

I haven't dealt with technical support directly. Therefore, I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are in general. I don't have experience with them on that personal level. 

There is no setup process to deal with as the entire solution is on the cloud. It's very easy.

If you need to deploy it to a license, the first server you use you need to pay for a license. If you're going to open-source, there are no licenses required.

I'm just a customer and have clients on the solution.

I've had a very good experience with the product. I would rate it at a ten out of ten.

I would recommend the product to all developers.

It is useful in many scenarios. For example, in a microservices architecture where serverless functionality is required, one can use Lambda.

The basic feature that I like is that there is no server installation. It also has good support for various languages, such as Java, .NET, C#, and Python.

Its price should be improved. Its pricing is on the higher side. 

I am not sure if it currently supports the Go language. If it doesn't support the Go language, they can introduce it.

It is stable.

It is flexible and scalable. I have a couple of customers who are using Lambda. They are from the banking domain.

I've not reached out to Lambda technical support, but they should be good.

Its installation is simple. It doesn't require much effort. It hardly takes 10 to 15 minutes to make a Lambda service functional.

We had done the installation with the vendor. We have three developers for its implementation.

Its pricing is on the higher side.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten.

We have some APIs and we use some mechanisms to process these APIs. Normally, some APIs need to be hosted by some servers. However, with this product, we can compute everything serverless.

The solution is designed very well. You don't need to keep a server up. You just need some router to route your API request and Lambda provides a very well-designed feature to process the request. 

From our perspective, the solution works for a variety of scenarios.

It's very straightforward and very easy to use. We don't need to keep several apps. We just use some APIs and to route with the APIs to create related Lambda functions.

The kind of scenarios we can leverage in Lambda can be difficult. For example, we have a lot of their servers that provide APIs. Before, the APIs were hosted by a server. We have identified that some of them can be hosted in Lambda. That's a challenge as we're yet to think of our scenario and match our requirements in order to really leverage Lambda. That's more on us than the solution itself.

We need to better understand Lambda for different scenarios. We need some joint effort between Amazon and the users to have the users identify how they can really leverage Lambda. It's not about Lambda itself; it's about the practice, the guidance. There needs to be very good documentation. From the user perspective, what exists now is not always enough.

Lambda is stable. We don't see any problems so far. There haven't been bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze on us.

The solution is very scalable. We just allocated a very small number of requirements to Lambda. We've still found it to be very scalable.

We are a technology company, so we do not have many users. Most are developers, engineers, and architects.

So far, we've found the technical support to be okay. They are knowledgeable and responsive and we are satisfied with the level of support we get.

The initial setup's level of difficulty depends on different requirements. Normally, we can see that number to process and do a straight comparative analysis for a simple scenario. The deployment is fine for the most part. We don't spend much time on it in comparison to a traditional deployment. It's very quick.

When you try some services, with Amazon, the first phase is okay. When we continued with more workloads placed on Amazon, we needed to take into account the cost, as the cost to the firm becomes more and more. It can get expensive if you aren't careful.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

Lambda is very good. I don't collect feedback from other colleagues or other members. However, from my perspective, Lambda is good. I would rate it nine out of ten, based on my experience alone.

The best advice I can give other organizations is that it's better to consider your scenarios and see what is scenario is suitable for the functions or services you require, or not. Don't try to move your applications just because of new technology and new concepts. Consider carefully your requirements and that will help you avoid some additional costs.