"SnapStart for Python" costs extra though. If we are paying then you can even have prewarmed Python lambdas with no cold start on AWS (Provisioned Concurrency).

▲

Yacoby 4 days ago | parent [-]

Unless I misunderstand, AWS SnapStart and their memory snapshots are the same feature (taking memory snapshots to speed up cold start). It doesn't seem a fair comparison to ignore this and my assumption is because AWS Lambda SnapStart is faster.

	▲	killingtime74 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I think it's fair because AWS charges extra for it. They are comparing the baseline product of all three platforms. Why should we take paid add ons into account for 1 platform. As I mentioned, if you are ok with paying, then you should also compare Provisioned concurrency on AWSbas well, which has 0 cold start (they keep a prewarmed lambda for you). Product comparisons are not purely technical in nature. As a user, if im paying extra, I would much rather the 0 cold start than just a reduced cold start especially with all these additional complexities.
	▲	dom96 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It wasn't an intentional omission, we weren't aware of this feature in AWS Lambda. The blog post has been updated to reflect that the numbers are for Lambda without SnapStart enabled. Python Workers use snapshots by default and unlike SnapStart we don't charge extra for it. For many use cases, you can run Python Workers completely for free on our platform and benefit from the faster cold starts.