Hacker News Reader

It's closer to FCGI, since Lambda processes aren't restarted for each new request.

Question: why doesn't Amazon just use the standard FCGI interface, then?

Maybe they are; as far as I know, the protocol they use to communicate with the worker isn't specified, all they say is "implement a function with this signature, then import our SDK, and it will call your function". This gives them the flexibility to switch protocols at will, at the cost of having to implement these SDKs.

That said, building a FCGI "bridge" isn't hard, it's just that nobody cared enough to do it.

They have specified the lambda runtime. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/runtimes-api.ht...

Basically: your instance POSTS to an endpoint to get/reply to requests, one at a time.

I can't wait until you can specify that a lambda instance can handle a certain # of requests in parallel. Ex: things just blocked on IO/DB. That would make better use of your RAM.

My new serverless-to-CGI bridge will be called "hipstercgid"

Several times. :D

Is this supposed to be a bad thing?

No, it's just ironic. It also means that AWS could potentially reuse standard (F)CGI interfaces.