Amazon API Gateway vs. Kong Konnect

API GW is great for giving access to asynchronous operations that are fast and don't need to be online all the time. Lambda functions are the classic example. In the past, an operation that is called on via an HTTP endpoint would be implemented using a server-based solution. With high availability in place that would include a server or two and a load balancer. Over time this setup can be costly, especially if the service is not used at full capacity; cycles are wasted when the servers are sitting there waiting to respond. If the operation can be distilled down to a function, an API GW + Lambda solution could be put in place that performs the operation as needed only when requested. Comparing the low price point for API GW requests and Lambda CPU+Memory, the savings can be night and day over the server-based implementation.

Incentivized

Using Kong [Konnect]'s declarative settings, a user may control traffic, automate deployment, and maintain container-based software after it's deployed. In addition, it handles the whole lifecycle of service management. Installation, management, and operation of Kong [Konnects]'s cloud-native connection runtimes may be performed in any cloud or Kubernetes provider environment, as well as on-premises environments. In order to optimise their services and transactions, users may keep track of their services and transactions in real-time via real-time monitoring.

Incentivized

• API Gateway integrates well with AWS Lambda. This allows us to build a web server in the language and framework of our choice, deploy it as a Lambda function, and expose it through API Gateway.
• API Gateway manages API keys. Building rate limiting and request quota features are not trivial (or interesting).
• API Gateway's pricing can be very attractive for services that are accessed infrequently.

Incentivized

• Application orchestration
• Error tracing
• Analyzing traffic
• Load balancing

Incentivized

• I think there should be another way of enabling CORS. It basically creates OPTIONS for every endpoint, which makes your API Gateway look complicated.
• The integration timeout limit is 30 seconds, which limits you into that time.
• API Gateway UI should be improved and should work correctly when more than two people are adding/editing endpoints.

Incentivized

• Community support
• Sample projects for easy integration

Incentivized

We always had a great experience with the AWS support team. They were always on time and very dependable. It was a good partnership while we worked to resolve our issues.

Incentivized

Pricing is better at Amazon API gateway. Amazon API gateway is more user-friendly than SAP HANA Cloud. But SAP HANA Cloud supports more programming languages. The centralized management and monitoring system of Amazon API Gateway is more user-friendly. The User-Interface of Amazon API gateway is also better. Overall we can conclude that Amazon API Gateway provides a better work experience than SAP HANA.

Incentivized

• Positive, which accelerated business deliveries in months
• Negative, but in our positive case, if you are going to change the solution in the future, you need to adjust several things for the new solution.
• Positive, users celebrated with ease of use (lower learning curve, lower cost).
• Positive - Pay according to usage

Incentivized

• Increased application efficiency
• Reduced system downtown
• Significantly improved error resolution

Incentivized