4 ms·

Because Lambda/Cloud functions are meant for scripting tasks in your cloud environment, not for building full-fledged apps. (Lambdas couldn't even be triggered

by hassy 10y ago

Because Lambda/Cloud functions are meant for scripting tasks in your cloud environment, not for building full-fledged apps. (Lambdas couldn't even be triggered with HTTP calls when AWS Lambda launched.)

osipov 10y ago
Here's how Google defines Cloud Functions: "Lightweight Event-based Microservices". Google Cloud Functions is a lightweight, event-based, asynchronous compute solution that allows you to create small, single-purpose functions that respond to cloud events without the need to manage a server or a runtime environment. Where is the reference to scripting?
- nathankunicki 10y ago
  He is correct though, it's even in the sentence you quoted: "...single-purpose functions that respond to cloud events..." They are meant to react to events within your infrastructure, rather than being public facing application endpoints.
orasis 10y ago
I'm building a full fledged app. http://blog.improve.ai/ http://blog.improve.ai/ Once there is an Express type framework on top of Lambda and API Gateway, it will be a natural development model.
vikeri 10y ago
I spoke to a solutions architect on AWS who said that their recommendation for building a new backend service (eg. a REST API) is to use API gateway and Lambda. I definitely got the impression that he meant full-fledged apps.
- nickbauman 10y ago
  I did this. AppEngine is a far more cohesive and polished service than cobbling together Lambda, S3, API Gateway, SQS and Dynamo (which you'd need to do to actually have a fully functioning site).
- zippergz 10y ago
  I have done some (small-ish) projects with API Gateway and Lambda. Lambda itself is pretty nice. The API Gateway is a pain, and has a lot of rough edges. Especially if you need to do anything other than standard JSON in and out. I’ve spent way more time than I’d like to admit futzing with mapping templates and models to try to get stuff to work the right way. And then dealing with errors from the Lambda function in a sensible way is a headache all its own. I generally really like AWS and I use it for a ton of stuff, but I very much welcome competition and innovation in this space.
madeofpalk 10y ago
Yes. I'm a massive fan of AWS Lambda, but using it to serve public API quests is just a nightmare. Just because you _can_ do something, doesn't mean you should. I'm constantly puzzled by why people use Lambda for this - if you don't want to deal with managing traditional services, there's plenty of other options out there (in AWS and otherwise) that are much more suited to the task of serving a website.

by hassy 10y ago

osipov 10y ago

Here's how Google defines Cloud Functions: "Lightweight Event-based Microservices". Google Cloud Functions is a lightweight, event-based, asynchronous compute solution that allows you to create small, single-purpose functions that respond to cloud events without the need to manage a server or a runtime environment. Where is the reference to scripting?

nathankunicki 10y ago
He is correct though, it's even in the sentence you quoted: "...single-purpose functions that respond to cloud events..." They are meant to react to events within your infrastructure, rather than being public facing application endpoints.

orasis 10y ago

I'm building a full fledged app. http://blog.improve.ai/ http://blog.improve.ai/ Once there is an Express type framework on top of Lambda and API Gateway, it will be a natural development model.

vikeri 10y ago

I spoke to a solutions architect on AWS who said that their recommendation for building a new backend service (eg. a REST API) is to use API gateway and Lambda. I definitely got the impression that he meant full-fledged apps.

nickbauman 10y ago
I did this. AppEngine is a far more cohesive and polished service than cobbling together Lambda, S3, API Gateway, SQS and Dynamo (which you'd need to do to actually have a fully functioning site).
zippergz 10y ago
I have done some (small-ish) projects with API Gateway and Lambda. Lambda itself is pretty nice. The API Gateway is a pain, and has a lot of rough edges. Especially if you need to do anything other than standard JSON in and out. I’ve spent way more time than I’d like to admit futzing with mapping templates and models to try to get stuff to work the right way. And then dealing with errors from the Lambda function in a sensible way is a headache all its own. I generally really like AWS and I use it for a ton of stuff, but I very much welcome competition and innovation in this space.

madeofpalk 10y ago

Yes. I'm a massive fan of AWS Lambda, but using it to serve public API quests is just a nightmare. Just because you _can_ do something, doesn't mean you should. I'm constantly puzzled by why people use Lambda for this - if you don't want to deal with managing traditional services, there's plenty of other options out there (in AWS and otherwise) that are much more suited to the task of serving a website.