4 ms·

Downloading files is something I would not be using serverless due to the timeouts - 900s

• mcintyre1994 7y ago
  If you're downloading a file that takes anywhere near that long every hour then it's probably a bad choice for cost reasons too. Most files aren't big enough to take 15 minutes to download though.
• bmm6o 7y ago
  If you're at the point where you're worried about the timeout, you should also be worried about the disk space available to your Lambda. The file should be stored in and served from S3.
  • scarface74 7y ago
    You can stream a file directly from a source to S3.
• sgtcodfish 7y ago
  As others have said, if you're gonna be reaching that kind of timeout, the use case would come under this caveat I mentioned: > assuming the task isn't hugely inappropriate We have a couple of cases where reasonably small files (< 100MB but it'd work with larger) need to be downloaded from one place and placed in another, potentially with an ETag check to prevent redundant uploads/downloads. Lambda is perfect for that.