4 ms·

Their quoted limits on AWS seem quite off. > As of 2024, they can only use 3 CPUs (6 threads) and 10 GB of memory Actually you get 1vCPU (eg a hyperthread) pe

Their quoted limits on AWS seem quite off. > As of 2024, they can only use 3 CPUs (6 threads) and 10 GB of memory Actually you get 1vCPU (eg a hyperthread) per 1769MB of memory[1] [1] -https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/configuration-function-common.html#configuration-memory-console https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/configuration-f... > Response bandwidth is 2 Mbps This is shockingly low, and I wouldn't believe it without data. 16Mbps (2MB/s) would be more believable. In my experience you can reliably get 25MB/s (~400Mbps) in the network layer of things in AWS.

arrakeenrevived 3y ago
You're correct, it is 2 MB/s. The actual bandwidth from the AWS Lambda docs is: >Uncapped for the first 6 MB of your function's response. For responses larger than 6 MB, 2MBps for the remainder of the response Some of the other numbers in the article are also incorrect. Lambda functions using containers can use a 10 GB container image (the article claims 50 MB), and container images are actually the faster/preferred way to do it these days.
ekzhang 3y ago
(Author) Yes, it’s in the page linked in the section — and the maximum memory is 10240 MB, so that’s 5.8 vCPU < 3 physical CPUs. Good point about 2 Mbps vs 2 MBps, I’ll update that. Forgive me for the typo!