4 ms·

Isn't lambda suicide for a startup? Think of all the lock-in here. If you go big you could suddenly find yourself really stuck if you're overly dependent on

• snikch 11y ago
  If it enables a start up to grow without having to worry about scale, I don't think so. You could say the same of a lot of the technologies in a cloud provider. At the end of the day, if you want to take advantage of the speed to market and cost reductions these technologies enable, you're going to have to take a punt.
• easong 11y ago
  It's actually not bad at all - I can't speak for the java side of things, but transitioning a couple random nodejs services to lambda took under ten minutes each, with most of that time being testing (my only complaint is that the logging sucks). Lambda function are so modular that I can't imagine not being able to trivially slot them back in to a standard express endpoint. It might be tricky if you do a bunch of stuff with S3, but even then it shouldn't be terribly difficult to sub in the standard AWS modules.
• cbhl 11y ago
  A startup is more likely to die for another reason first, such as a founder-breakup, or some form of "running out of money". Google App Engine and Heroku and Azure also have lock-in too, to varying degrees -- but at the start it still makes sense to use these sorts of services rather than worry about lock-in. (And if someone later gives you $100k of compute credits on their platform, and it costs you less than that to rewrite the "lock-in" parts, then you still win.)
• joeyspn 11y ago
  > Isn't lambda suicide for a startup? With no upfront costs and w/o the need to manage servers I'd say it's actually the other way around! ;)