4 ms·
Except Lambda is quite expensive. Compared to equivalent EC2 t2 instances, Lambda is 4.6x the cost of on-demand, or ~20x of spot instances. I really don't under
by zbjornson 11y ago
Except Lambda is quite expensive. Compared to equivalent EC2 t2 instances, Lambda is 4.6x the cost of on-demand, or ~20x of spot instances. I really don't understand why anyone would use it for a high-volume web app. For low-volume sites you have the advantage of not paying for idle time, but the inflection point is somewhere around 13 minutes per hour.
- fndrplayer13 11y agoLambda is great though at handling services that see unpredictable spikes of traffic throughout the day where its difficult to provision quickly. Its also really good at reducing machine-management issues where your software doesn't utilize resources very well on a given machine. While its a bandaid on writing well-designed scalable software, it does allow you in the interim to take somewhat inflexible software and scale parts of it independently of physical machines. edit: To clarify, I mean if you're running software that does something on a given set of physical machines and you cant get job throughput higher than some number, n, on a given machine it can be prohibitively expensive to scale machines ahead of time or during load. With Lambda we have the option to run a ton of independent processes on theoretically independent machines to vastly increase throughput while we slog through improving our design to improve per-machine throughput on our legacy EC2 infrastructure. Lambda allows you to isolate your scale problem to 1 job per container at a time instead of looking at machines as capable of only `n` jobs at a time.