I finally have stored procedures and triggers for my DynamoDB database!
AWS Lambda
141–150 of 164 posts
Re: AWS Lambda
#142I wish they hadn't named the units of computation "Lambda functions". Cause, you know there's already something known as a "Lambda function" in computer science. But kudos for Amazon for furthering the datacenter-is-the-computer approach. It is simply the right thing to do.
I'm just the opposite - when I heard they were releasing a new service called Lamda, I immediately wondered whether it was like the inline lambda function in Python - and when I read through the description - they were very similar in nature.
Amazon has a LOT of services, and the better the naming scheme they use, the easier it will be to remember what they each are. I'm genuinely happy that they used a name that will make it trivial to map the function (heh) it serves in my head.
Re: AWS Lambda
#143I'm so torn - on one side this is a very neat thing that'll save a lot of boilerplate, and on the other it screams of vendor lock-in.
Open source replacement https://github.com/CloudI/CloudI in early stage.
Re: AWS Lambda
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not arguing they will not be able to tell the difference... I'm arguing it will cause confusion at some point, and maybe that's a negative externality of naming this product "Lambda." Nobody said "lose a generation of CS students." And, as I've noticed in the past, searching for "y combinator" + any language name will often keep useful results away until you finally block this site. I'm not sure if this is still…
I hear there is a river named Amazon in Southern Hemisphere and there are people landing in Seattle for river expeditions.
Yes, but that river does not sell software to run an online store. That's about as close to Amazon.com as AWS Lambda is to a Lambda function.
If you tried to sell ecommerce software under the name Amazon, you would get a cease-and-desist very quickly.
Re: AWS Lambda
#145I wish they hadn't named the units of computation "Lambda functions". Cause, you know there's already something known as a "Lambda function" in computer science. But kudos for Amazon for furthering the datacenter-is-the-computer approach. It is simply the right thing to do.
I'm guessing they borrowed it from this : http://lambda-architecture.net/
I don't think so. That is another naming abomination.
Re: AWS Lambda
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like you're seriously saying that people who are studying computer science lack the ability to tell the difference. Naming the product something that closely resembles its functionality seems like a great idea for a product. It's still Amazon Lambda, and I think it's very unlikely that people will simply refer to it as "Lambda." If CS students find themselves hopelessly confused by this product name, they ar…
I'm not arguing they will not be able to tell the difference... I'm arguing it will cause confusion at some point, and maybe that's a negative externality of naming this product "Lambda." Nobody said "lose a generation of CS students." And, as I've noticed in the past, searching for "y combinator" + any language name will often keep useful results away until you finally block this site. I'm not sure if this is still…
What's the difference between not being able to tell the difference and being confused? I'd say it's not a meaningful distinction.
Re: AWS Lambda
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw it and was shocked that Python is not yet supported.
I guess it is due to the sanboxing issue, which is pretty hard to get right.
I dont think so - the docs suggest you get a full Linux that your code runs on, not just a limited sandbox, one of the blogs mentioned running binary code. So I don't think it is being sandboxed at the language level. Especially as they talked about adding more languages soon.
Re: AWS Lambda
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
as MBlume mentionned[1], they seem to support NodeJS. From the FAQ : "At launch AWS Lambda supports code written in Node.js (JavaScript). Your code can include existing Node.js libraries, even native ones." so it seems that you can avoid lock-in if most of your javascript code is not too coupled to Amazon's API And they claim on the detail page: "With AWS Lambda, there are no new languages, tools, or frameworks to le…
Err, I think the parent's point wasn't lockin in terms of the code you write, but in terms of your architecture. Setting up your own system driven off of s3 or dynamodb events (if you wanted to move the functions onto your own bare metal) would be a pretty big project.
ZeroVM lets you run code on Swift, Openstack's S3 clone. Although it is not evented, and they mainly support Python, so it is a way off at present.
Re: AWS Lambda
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I saw it and was shocked that Python is not yet supported.
Most of the Python things I would want to do have slow startup times. Generally I keep my pythons running. But node is super quick to start.
That's an interesting perspective - what's a slow startup time in this context?
A quick back-of-the-envelope test on my machine for both node and python suggest similar (around 100 ms) start up times for the bare environments.
Do you just mean that you'd prefer to use node for smaller jobs anyway?
Re: AWS Lambda
#150One difficult part of doing event triggered processing is in the progress reporting and keeping the code related to it simple. I wonder how they deal with that.