3 ms·
AWS Lambda is great for inconsistent atomic workloads. However, I had a fairly disappointing experience with Lamda when I tested it just last week. For example
by aleem 11y ago
AWS Lambda is great for inconsistent atomic workloads. However, I had a fairly disappointing experience with Lamda when I tested it just last week.
For example, you cannot send dynamic response headers using the AWS API Gateway (the complementary service to expose HTTP endpoints). In my case I wanted to change the mime-type depending on JSON vs JSONP response.
It's also not possible to connect Lambda directly to ElastiCache and mostly you are expected to work with S3 or DynamoDB (Amazon's proprietary JSON store and what was mostly responsible for the data outage recently in US East). ElastiCache would allow easy persistence which is why it's surprising it can't be connected to given that it's an AWS service (you can connect to it by creating an EC2 proxy but that would defeat the purpose of a serverless architecture).
Some other oddities were sniffing the response body to set HTTP headers as opposed to just allowing your Lambda function to set the HTTP header directly or parsing the JSON response as opposed to doing a regex match.
- impostervt 11y agoI've been playing around with API Gateway & Lambda a bit lately, and it definitely feels like these services are sometimes built by teams that don't talk to each other. API Gateway tries really hard to HIDE things from you. For instance, you can't see what the requested URL was without using a fair bit of VTL to put it back together from some other variables. Any only lately can get you a full list of query parameters, without having to specify them at the time of API creation. In fact, it seems like most of the work on API Gateway, since it's release, has been to let end-users have more access to data they hid in the first place.