4 ms·

When US east was freaking out last year, we found Lambda was unreliable. For days ahead of the outages, Lambda would take many hours to respond to S3 events. W

by chisleu 10y ago

When US east was freaking out last year, we found Lambda was unreliable. For days ahead of the outages, Lambda would take many hours to respond to S3 events. When the events eventually came in and fired an event, the logs reflected the time, hours before, when it should have happened. Sadly, I don't have a support contract so I couldn't get any help. The forums just assumed I was doing something wrong, until the outage which was linked to dynamo IIRC. We moved on from lambda as well.

laluser 10y ago
Was this when it was still in preview? Lambda is still pretty new having launched in November 2014. Reliability and features for Lambda are getting better though [1][2]. AWS seems pretty invested in Lambda, so I think it's just a matter of time until it feels like a 'mature' offering. 1. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-lambda-update-production-status-and-a-focus-on-mobile-apps/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-lambda-update-productio... 2. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/category/aws-lambda/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/category/aws-lambda/
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- chisleu 10y ago
  No. This was last outage. I believe that was around September 2015.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
rocky1138 10y ago
> We moved on from lambda as well. To what, might I ask?
- chisleu 10y ago
  Queue processing. I am a big fan of Celery. I love lambda, and if I had a budget and a contract, I'm sure Amazon would have solved the issue. However, I think it was merely an underlying problem. I believe Lambda uses Dynamodb streams under the hood.
  - jiaweihli 10y ago
    If you're in the JVM ecosystem, you may want to check out http://akka.io http://akka.io, which is self hosted lambda with more features and better documentation.
optimuspaul 10y ago
We have seen issues with Lambda and S3 events as well. Our solution was to feed SQS the events and process them with lambda and no more problems. No idea why SQS would make a difference but it did.

by chisleu 10y ago

laluser 10y ago

Was this when it was still in preview? Lambda is still pretty new having launched in November 2014. Reliability and features for Lambda are getting better though [1][2]. AWS seems pretty invested in Lambda, so I think it's just a matter of time until it feels like a 'mature' offering. 1. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-lambda-update-production-status-and-a-focus-on-mobile-apps/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-lambda-update-productio... 2. https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/category/aws-lambda/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/category/aws-lambda/

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
chisleu 10y ago
No. This was last outage. I believe that was around September 2015.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

rocky1138 10y ago

> We moved on from lambda as well. To what, might I ask?

chisleu 10y ago
Queue processing. I am a big fan of Celery. I love lambda, and if I had a budget and a contract, I'm sure Amazon would have solved the issue. However, I think it was merely an underlying problem. I believe Lambda uses Dynamodb streams under the hood.
- jiaweihli 10y ago
  If you're in the JVM ecosystem, you may want to check out http://akka.io http://akka.io, which is self hosted lambda with more features and better documentation.

optimuspaul 10y ago

We have seen issues with Lambda and S3 events as well. Our solution was to feed SQS the events and process them with lambda and no more problems. No idea why SQS would make a difference but it did.