AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

We are a startup, and we are doing faster and cheaper storage for IT. We are going to offer our storage services in about two months, and we are starting with AWS. We do lossless compression using microservices. We do the compute in a lossless compression way similar to gzip, WinZip, or PKZIP, except that we are giving a discount to customers.

The product that we are developing is not yet in the market. We are doing alpha testing for select customers who are using AWS. The biggest advantage is that you get faster storage without doing a forklift upgrade, and you get 35% cheaper storage. So, you get 2X faster storage with a 35% to 50% lower monthly bill.

We use AWS Lambda to encode and decode data. I work on the encode and decode software. I am working with a cloud developer. He works on the Lambda deliverable and wraps my C code with his C++ wrappers. They get bundled together with no JS stuff.

The cool thing about AWS Lambda is that AWS does all the management. For compression, it is all about making the data small and then making it regular size again. We have an encode function and a decode function. AWS Lambda schedules each of those for us. It has a load balancer and all the fancy stuff, depending on the demand.

The most valuable part of AWS Lambda is that I only need to write the software. I need to write two functions, and my cloud developer turns them into two AWS Lambda instances. That's it.

One area of improvement is to include support for more programming languages. AWS Lambda does not support a lot of programming languages. You have to write the Lambda functions in a certain programming language. We are using C++. My developer knows a couple of other languages. Python is his favorite language, but Python is not supported in AWS Lambda.

I have been using AWS Lambda since it came out in 2016.

It is very stable.

Its scalability is great. We write an encode function, and my cloud developer turns that into an AWS Lambda instance. We then write a decode function, and he turns it into another AWS Lambda instance. We just hook it up and use an API gateway for doing the security check, encryption, and other things.

We did not require any support. Most of the stuff in the cloud is anyways self-serve.

The initial setup was straightforward.

They have a program for AWS customers called Activate. With the Activate program, you can get compute and storage credits. They gave us like $10,000 worth of credit over 18 months.

I would recommend using this solution. It was the first microservice. It doesn't have much overhead, and it does what it claims to do. 

I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten. It is a good solution.

AWS Lambda needs to improve its stability. 

I have been using the solution for a couple of months. 

I would rate AWS Lambda an eight out of ten. 

The solution is scalable. I would rate it around eight out of ten. 

AWS Lambda is cheap. 

I would rate the tool an eight out of ten. 

We had to deploy some serverless Node.js applications.

The solution works for small applications. It is a serverless tool that is quick to spin up. We needn’t consider anything in the bag.

I want to see support for longer applications. I need the 15-minute time-out window to improve.

I have been using the solution for about two to three years.

The tool is stable and you can rely on it for production service.

I think there were no issues with the size of the application we used, so I didn't see any noticeable scaling issues with Lambda. It's overall a good service.

The tech support is always good but it depends on the type of plan. We use the enterprise support plan which offers quick responses.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward.

I would rate the tool’s pricing a nine out of ten. The solution’s pricing works on a pay-as-you-go basis.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use AWS Lambda for jobs that we just want to offload to a cloud function. We are an educational institution, and if I want to upload an exam I generated for all my students, then I just write the script on AWS Lambda. That is, we use it for independent jobs that we can offload on their own.

I like the pay-for-what-you-use feature. This is the main reason why we use AWS Lambda. I don't have to manage servers; I just have to configure Lambda and expose it to an API gateway.

AWS Lambda's cold start needs to be improved. It has to warm up first, and so, the response time is slower.

Another challenge I've noticed is that there is a limit to the environment variables such as the 4 KB limit. Although, the advice is to use parameters or other things to store the details when the limit has exceeded the data, this adds additional intensity to the application. If the size limits for environment variables can be revealed, it would be helpful. Even if we have to pay for it, at least we would know that we are not dealing with latency. So, I would like to see the size of the environment variables increased.

I've been using AWS Lambda for one year.

It's very stable.

AWS Lambda is scalable; I don't need to worry about it. At present, we have less than 10 people using this solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. It can be done on the console, and you can use the infrastructure as the code.

The deployment time can vary from 10 minutes to an hour depending on your needs and how comfortable you are with AWS Lambda.

AWS Lambda now supports multiple languages, but find out if the language you want to use to write your jobs is supported by it. If it is supported, then you are good to go.

Because AWS Lambda is scalable and does what it's meant to do, I would rate it at nine on a scale from one to ten.

AWS Lambda's best features are log analysis and event triggering and actioning.

AWS Lambda's GUI could be improved with a twist or tweak in its look and feel to make it more impressive.

AWS Lambda is reliable.

AWS's technical support is amazing - they can turn a case around in a single email.

The initial setup is straightforward as Lambda is a built-in feature of AWS services.

AWS Lambda is phenomenal with data, and I would rate it nine out of ten.

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.

Lambda makes the administration of all our services related to Amazon really easy. 

The metrics and reporting for this solution could be improved. 

I have been using this solution since 2017. 

From a stability perspective, I would rate it a seven out of ten. There is some room for improvement when it comes to stability of the features. 

This is a scalable solution. I would rate it a nine out of ten in this regard. 

The initial setup is complex. 

I would recommend this solution to others. Overall, the solution has improved since we started using it in 2017. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.