AWS Lambda Reviews

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.

The product serves as a function as a service, a serverless environment, you can say. It's a serverless environment, or, as some people call it, function as a service, FaaS.

We have been using it as a mobile backend. We have a mobile frontend, a mobile application, which uses the AWS Lambda functions running in the cloud. It serves as an API backend for a mobile application that is running in the frontend.

The solution is highly scalable.

The solution has proven itself to be stable.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

We've found the cost to be very good. It would be a great option for startups due to the low pricing.

The solution is very mature.

The user-friendliness of the solution could be improved. If it was easy to run with the same function in other platforms, other environments, that would make it more portable. That would be really good. User-friendliness and portability will be the two factors that need the most improvement.

The startup time sometimes needs to be faster, so that is one area of improvement. The startup time of each function can be slow. When it works the first time, it takes a little bit of time, so there's a minor delay. That could be improved.

The support of additional languages would improve the solution.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is pretty mature by now. It's been there for a few years with AWS and they're continuously improving it. It's pretty mature. The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The solution is highly scalable and also very cost-efficient. You only pay for the time, the duration of time and that's in maybe seconds, microseconds. You pay very little until you have very large-scale users. It is ideal for startups who want to deploy applications on the cloud.

While internally only our developers really use the solution, the mobile application is used by thousands of users globally.

We do plan to increase usage and will be adding more functions to our application.

While something was used before, it likely wasn't serverless. 

I'm aware that Oracle and Azure have certain options available.

The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult. It's very straightforward. 

The deployment times vary. It really depends on what you need to deploy.

Our developers managed the implementation process. A consultant or outside integrator was not required. It was all handled in-house.

The solution is very cost-efficient.

We are using the latest version of the solution currently. I cannot say which version number it is. I don't know it off-hand.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been pretty happy with the capabilities so far.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations. This is much better than the other serverless solutions.

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 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's most valuable feature is serverless architecture.

There are sometimes issues following an update.

I've been using AWS Lambda for about five years. 

AWS Lambda is stable.

AWS Lambda is scalable.

The initial setup was straightforward and took only a few minutes.

AWS Lambda's cloud version isn't expensive, and I'd rate its pricing as five out of five.

I would rate AWS Lambda ten out of ten.

I think the most valuable feature is the agility of the solution. You can deploy any codes you like and then control how you want them to be handled.

The deployment process is a bit complex, so it could be simplified to make it easier for beginners to deploy. 

I've been using Lambda for two years.

I reckon it's stable. We have not had any bugs with the solution. 

We have not had any problems with the scalability of the solution. We currently have roughly 100 users working with it. 

The tech support is very accommodating. If we have an issue or need to solve something, we speak directly to our Amazon contact person. This isn't really an issue, but their response time could be improved. I would rate the tech support as a four out of five.  

Positive

The price of the solution is reasonable. On a scale of one to five, with one being very expensive and five being competitive, I would rate Lambda a four. 

So far, the solution has been reliable and flexible. Our developers write the code, and we monitor any failures.

I would recommend Lambda to other users and rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our website is hosted on AWS, and we use Lambda to create trigger points.

Lambda's dashboard could be more user-friendly and customizable. I want the dashboard to have more information to quickly identify what functions and events are running. Also, we want to be able to add more trigger points, push notifications, and events. For example, we have a shopping website, so we want to create some events to trigger batch notifications like SMS.

I think my company implemented Lambda two years back, but I only joined 10 months ago.

Lambda is stable. We don't have any problems with this app.

Many things are on running on the site, so there is no issue with scalability.

We haven't had issues with this platform, so I haven't needed to contact support.

Actually, I am not recommended that thing. Actually, it is sent by our vendors. Actually, they implemented that thing.

I rate AWS Lambda 10 out of 10. I can recommend Lambda. It's a good fit for our use case. It's also suitable for companies of any size. For example, we're a large enterprise, and we've used Lambda without any problems in the last 10 months.

We mainly use AWS Lambda for data transformation and authentication.

We moved our users into the Amazon Cognito pool, so it helps us to standardize our security practices, approaches, etc. We can customize Lambda for authentication to integrate it with API Gateway and other services.

Lambda is a lot like AWS Stack. It integrates well with other products. 

We've been using AWS Lambda for a year.

AWS Lambda is stable. 

AWS Lambda is scalable. 

Amazon doesn't have enough local support based in our country. But we haven't had to use support much. There are enough publicly available materials on the internet, so it's pretty well documented.

The AWS Lambda setup is doable. 

AWS Lambda's price is reasonable.

I rate AWS Lambda nine out of 10.