Can't trigger lambda's on SQS FIFO
I am trying to trigger lambda execution to execute an item on a FIFO queue. Other than polling, what options do we have to accomplish that? We just learned that we cannot directly trigger a lambda execution from a FIFO queue, which is only supported from the standard queue at this time.
I also learned that we cannot subscribe an SNS topic to a FIFO queue – which is only supported on the standard queue as well.
Has anybody found a work around for this yet until Amazon releases an update?
amazon-web-services aws-lambda amazon-sqs
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
add a comment |
I am trying to trigger lambda execution to execute an item on a FIFO queue. Other than polling, what options do we have to accomplish that? We just learned that we cannot directly trigger a lambda execution from a FIFO queue, which is only supported from the standard queue at this time.
I also learned that we cannot subscribe an SNS topic to a FIFO queue – which is only supported on the standard queue as well.
Has anybody found a work around for this yet until Amazon releases an update?
amazon-web-services aws-lambda amazon-sqs
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
add a comment |
I am trying to trigger lambda execution to execute an item on a FIFO queue. Other than polling, what options do we have to accomplish that? We just learned that we cannot directly trigger a lambda execution from a FIFO queue, which is only supported from the standard queue at this time.
I also learned that we cannot subscribe an SNS topic to a FIFO queue – which is only supported on the standard queue as well.
Has anybody found a work around for this yet until Amazon releases an update?
amazon-web-services aws-lambda amazon-sqs
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
I am trying to trigger lambda execution to execute an item on a FIFO queue. Other than polling, what options do we have to accomplish that? We just learned that we cannot directly trigger a lambda execution from a FIFO queue, which is only supported from the standard queue at this time.
I also learned that we cannot subscribe an SNS topic to a FIFO queue – which is only supported on the standard queue as well.
Has anybody found a work around for this yet until Amazon releases an update?
amazon-web-services aws-lambda amazon-sqs
amazon-web-services aws-lambda amazon-sqs
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
asked Nov 21 '18 at 16:48
FrankFrank
6910
6910
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Your only option here is to poll the queue at certain intervals.
You can create a CloudWatch event trigger that invokes a lambda function (lets say every 10 minutes) which polls the queue and does the processing.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53416890%2fcant-trigger-lambdas-on-sqs-fifo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Your only option here is to poll the queue at certain intervals.
You can create a CloudWatch event trigger that invokes a lambda function (lets say every 10 minutes) which polls the queue and does the processing.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
add a comment |
Your only option here is to poll the queue at certain intervals.
You can create a CloudWatch event trigger that invokes a lambda function (lets say every 10 minutes) which polls the queue and does the processing.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
add a comment |
Your only option here is to poll the queue at certain intervals.
You can create a CloudWatch event trigger that invokes a lambda function (lets say every 10 minutes) which polls the queue and does the processing.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
Your only option here is to poll the queue at certain intervals.
You can create a CloudWatch event trigger that invokes a lambda function (lets say every 10 minutes) which polls the queue and does the processing.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
answered Nov 21 '18 at 16:52
AsdfgAsdfg
4,2971862122
4,2971862122
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
add a comment |
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
I'm interested to know why Amazon does it like this, with my limited knowledge I believe it has something to do with the lambdas spawning multiple instances when called? So if you had them on a FIFO SQS you couldn't be sure that they items are being processed in order because they run async? Correct me if I'm wrong.
– Frank
Nov 21 '18 at 19:06
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
Yes. That is what I think is the reason. If there are more messages in your SQS, more lambda functions will be invoked behind the scene means more lambda instances polling the same queue so it becomes difficult to mange the sequential execution.
– Asdfg
Nov 21 '18 at 19:12
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53416890%2fcant-trigger-lambdas-on-sqs-fifo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
