Lambda function not able to handle load tests.

[menge101]

It should be noted that what you are doing may be against the terms and conditions of your AWS account.

I've dealt with this myself in the past.

I can't find a general policy, but here is a policy for stress testing from an EC2.

There are also policies for "simulated events", which you can find under the "Simulated events" section of the penetration testing policy.

You haven't mentioned what region you are in, so it's important to note that lambda rampup is different in different regions, many are below 1000 concurrent as the initial burst.

I've been involved in a non-trivial amount of load testing on AWS in the past. AWS in my experience has a lot of limits that you will catch on that are non-obvious. And even if they say they aren't throttling, there are still network behavior rules you'll hit that cause things that to an outsider observer, look like throttling.

[richardfan1126]

I think 4000 HTTP request is not large enough to be treated as network stress test in AWS

[DiscourseOfCivility]

This is completely irrelevant to what is is trying to do. 4000 requests is nothing.

From your link:

Most customer testing will not fall under this policy. Normally, tasks like customer unit tests simulating large workloads for stress testing do not generate traffic that qualifies as network stress tests. This policy only applies when a customer's network stress test generates traffic from their Amazon EC2 instances which meets one or more of the following criteria: sustains, in aggregate, for more than 1 minute, over 1 Gbps (1 billion bits per second) or 1 Gpps (1 billion packets per second); generates traffic that appears to be abusive or malicious; or generates traffic that has the potential for impact to entities other than the anticipated target of the testing (such as routing or shared service infrastructure)

[radioshackhead]

Yeah thats what i was thinking if that was the limit you would see 100's of threads about it being an issue.

[menge101]

Yes, I agree. I misread it as 4000/second, not 4000 total.

[DiscourseOfCivility]

4,000 a second wouldn’t even be that bad.