Amazon API Gateway Reviews

Our clients have specific use cases. They require a gateway that performs well and can handle around three hundred requests per quarter.

It provides the flexibility to configure, switch, and manage configurations through cloud permissions or performance settings. This includes services such as cloud monitoring tools, user connections, and the essential components required for API services. The gateway, in conjunction with other interconnected services, facilitates smooth operations. It covers aspects like cloud monitoring, user authentication through cloud sign-ins, and more. In my experience, as a service that we use extensively, it acts as a master tool, offering easy configuration and excellent integration capabilities with third-party services.

It is somewhat costly, particularly when it introduces server-related features, which are often scheduled on our end. Their support services come at a considerable cost, leaving room for improvement.

I have been working with it for over five years.

The stability is highly guaranteed, as AWS itself provides the cloud service with a reliability of 99.99%. This translates to a maximum of two hours of downtime annually, making it an exceptionally stable platform. I would rate it nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability nine out of ten. I haven't observed any significant issues indicating a lack of scalability, as it can be efficiently managed through configurations. Our clientele primarily consists of enterprise customers.

Although they deliver high-quality services, the technical support comes at a significant cost. I would rate it six out of ten.

The initial setup is somewhat complex and I would rate it seven out of ten. The main challenges stem from the intricacies of subnets and the overall plan in place.

The deployment time is contingent on the other services we provide, the features we utilize, and the consultants involved. The duration of this process is influenced by the integration aspects, typically spanning just a few weeks. We deploy using the POC process, adapting specifics to client preferences and performance needs. Clients can choose Docker, Kubernetes, or Amazon API Gateway based on their interests and infrastructure requirements.

I would rate its pricing six out of ten.

Opting for the cloud is a swift decision, and once made, the process proceeds smoothly. The consensus is positive, with no apparent reluctance. However, a crucial point is the necessity for expertise, particularly in AWS. Without the right proficiency, the implementation might not proceed seamlessly. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I use Amazon API Gateway for student data management of microservices to share between other systems. The solution is used between different applications in our organization. Amazon API Gateway is used along with Salesforce, Oracle, ServiceNow and SQL solutions. 

The simplicity of use is one of the vital features of Amazon API Gateway. It's a low-code solution that helps our company manage operations seamlessly. 

The solution should include change data capture (CDC) features that will help reduce workload. The aforementioned feature can be introduced as a mini plug-in or additional license. 

 In future versions of the product, there can be automated integration capabilities for applications through AI. 

I have been using Amazon API Gateway since 2016. 

Amazon API Gateway is a highly stable solution. 

At our company, we had some issues with scaling initially, but that was resolved soon enough. Amazon API Gateway exhibits satisfying scalability. Our organization never faced any issues with the performance and scalability of the solution. The first two or three weeks post-adoption, we had some learning issues in the company. After fine-tuning certain aspects and updating the query optimization in the solution, we never faced any issues in our company. 

As our company had to migrate from a Microsoft environment and remove Informatica as the middleware, the introduction of microservices and the initial setup process were a bit difficult. In our company, it took us initially a month to setup the environment and configure the code for Amazon API Gateway.

After the solution was deployed into the CI/CD pipeline, we fine-tuned it in our company for a year. This was necessary because new applications and processes were added. 

Presently, our company team is experienced enough to deploy the solution in one or two days. When we first installed the solution around 2015 in our organization, there wasn't much information available about the product or the setup process. After deploying Amazon API Gateway, our company does not need to maintain the solution.

Our company website uses most of the data coming through the solution, so there are more than 200,000 end users of the solution per month. Some portions of the total data arrive from the backend systems and other additional applications, such as student services.

There are 35,000 students connected to our company, so they can be considered as end users of the solution too. Overall, I would say there are more than 400,000 users of Amazon API Gateway in our organization through mobile app access. 

Our company is able to realize an ROI using Amazon API Gateway for application management. 

Azure products are more cost-effective than AWS solutions. 

AWS is the pioneer for gateway solutions. But with tools like Azure API Management and Azure Active Directory, Microsoft has been able to gain a lot of traction, AWS needs to gain an edge with additional features to beat Microsoft as a competitor. In my company, Azure products are used much more than AWS solutions. I have witnessed, in recent times, large companies migrate towards Azure from AWS. 

For API management, the serverless Lambda in the tool is the most used feature from Amazon API Gateway. The aforementioned feature is quite easy to use and integrate in a minimal team structure and no knowledge of Dot.Net and SQL is required. Using the Lambda feature, our company team could develop certain services within two weeks. 

Authorization and access control features of Amazon API Gateway meet the security needs of our organization. At our organization, we needed to make some customizations such as both-end encryption for data security. The environment and provisioning capabilities are already present in a simplified format in Amazon API Gateway.

I would definitely recommend Amazon API Gateway to other users, I am able to design solutions completely using the tool. Some organizations don't prefer to work with multi-vendor products, and some customers might be already too habituated to the Azure environment products such as Azure Dynamics and ERP solutions due to the extensive features. I would overall rate Amazon API Gateway a nine out of ten. 

We primarily utilize Amazon API Gateway to expose our APIs externally and enhance security by implementing components such as input validation, filtering, and ensuring secure exposure through the gateway.

In our microservices architecture, we utilize Amazon API Gateway. However, since API Gateway doesn't directly support microservice architecture, we require a micro gateway infrastructure. This is why we're exploring alternative API management platforms.

Integrating API Gateway with other AWS services is seamless, especially with cloud-native services like Lambda. It's straightforward to expose APIs built with microservices using Lambda through API Gateway. Additionally, hosting other AWS services as endpoints within API Gateway is convenient.

The performance and scalability of our applications have been impacted by the API database. Managing API scalability is simplified by using API Gateway as a reverse proxy, which centralizes configuration management without requiring developers to modify code frequently. However, for scalability, we primarily rely on AWS's load balancing and autoscaling features rather than API Gateway. Nonetheless, the inherent scalability and manageability of API Gateway as a managed service are beneficial, alleviating concerns about its availability.

One of the most valuable aspects of API Gateway is its native integration with AWS services. This makes it simple to integrate with other services and automate processes within a single script, following a DevOps approach.

We have been utilizing the throttling feature for managing API traffic. With numerous legacy APIs in our system, we've witnessed a significant surge in API requests over time, leading to performance issues due to the lack of throttling. To address this, we require an easier way to adjust throttling settings dynamically as needed.

The authorization and access control features effectively address our security requirements. In terms of API authorization, we rely on OpenID Connect (OIDC), which is not native to AWS but serves our purposes well. User authorization is managed separately for each product platform, with built-in authorization mechanisms tailored to individual products.

API Gateway lacks some usability features that would make it a standard platform for development. For instance, it doesn't include a built-in developer portal, requiring custom development for such functionality. This customization can be extensive and akin to building an entire API management platform from scratch.

The API Gateway lacks the capability to directly facilitate API strategy development or user onboarding workflows. For instance, it doesn't offer out-of-the-box features like developer portals or publisher portals, which are essential for streamlining user onboarding and interaction. These portals play a crucial role in enhancing user adoption by providing a seamless experience for developers and users alike. Currently, API Gateway primarily serves as a technical gateway without built-in support for user engagement functionalities.

I have been working with it for five years.

We serve over a hundred end users across various product areas since our company hosts multiple products. Consequently, we offer distinct API products tailored to each product domain.

We benefit from enterprise support, ensuring prompt responses from the technical support team. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of API Gateway can be somewhat complex, especially if you're unfamiliar with how it operates within AWS. Configuring access control and other aspects like DNS settings can be tricky without prior knowledge of API Gateway and AWS services. Therefore, there's a learning curve associated with setting up API Gateway, which may entail some upfront learning costs.

Deployment time for API Gateway is notably swift. When initiating a new creation within API Gateway, the integration with the DevOps pipeline, especially if all components reside within AWS, ensures a seamless and rapid deployment process. It swiftly establishes the API, sets up the necessary infrastructure, configures the API Gateway, and identifies the requisite DNS for the Gateway endpoints.

I believe the return on investment for API Gateway is satisfactory.

The pricing model for API Gateway is advantageous due to its serverless nature, as it depends on traffic volume. Continuous traffic incurs reasonable costs, as the pricing is based on usage. This flexibility in pricing is appreciated, as it reflects the efficiency of the service provided.

I would recommend API Gateway to those who are uncertain about their API management vision and are already on the AWS platform. It presents an excellent opportunity to start with API management without committing to a specific strategy immediately. Overall, I would rate it six out of ten.

I've primarily used the solution to call Lambda functions and embrace new features that they introduce. My role doesn't require me to explore the full range of API Gateway features, but rather simpler ones like repair gateway functions as and when required. Additionally, in relation to AWS Step Functions, there are key distinctions between instant and long-life step functions that should be highlighted. It isn’t very transparent and useful for me. Instant step functions are suitable for tasks that can be completed within around ten minutes, whereas long-lived ones can endure for extended periods by saving their states between steps.

API Gateway offers a multitude of configuration parameters that enable versatile request filtering and protection against potential attacks. It's possible to customize settings based on the specific needs of the application. Additionally, API Gateway supports integration with various technologies.

Covering all the functions is difficult due to the extensive range, but it excels in simplifying the process of building endpoints swiftly.

When working with XML payloads, there can be issues due to the lack of a seamless connection between API Gateway and Lambda functions. This has led me to devise shortcuts that aren't entirely straightforward but serve my needs.

It's important to consider the type of gateway endpoint carefully. There appear to be two distinct types. It's crucial to make an informed selection based on your project's requirements. When utilizing API Gateway, the choices one makes regarding endpoint types and properties are pivotal. After initially choosing an endpoint type, it is difficult to switch to a different type later on.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for five years. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. However, one interesting point is that Amazon claims to have a step functions engine that can be executed not only in the cloud but also on your personal laptop or on-premises environments. This usage is intended for testing and development rather than production purposes. Although I haven't personally utilized it, I'm interested in this feature which can expand the market for Amazon's solution and offers an interesting avenue for evaluation.

It is highly scalable. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

API Gateway's technical support is good. Many common cases are already covered through guides and resources. I haven't personally encountered an issue requiring assistance, I am aware that they are responsive when asked for support.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is a service that Amazon provides. There are three types of configurations; Web UI, Command Line Control, and Plug-in. The command line control allows you to set and configure a gateway. The plugin allows you to fine-tune API Gateway settings and manage various endpoints directly.

API Gateway is an Amazon service that doesn't require deployment on the local workstation. Using WebUI, you configure settings, click "deploy," and the changes are stored on Amazon's storage, taking only a few seconds for the changes to take effect. Unlike traditional deployment, you're not creating binary files. Instead, you're adjusting configuration settings.

There is no team needed for deployment, however, a software architect is needed for the configuration.

I would recommend the solution to others. You should consider using API Gateway when working with other Amazon cloud components like Amazon RD, Amazon storage, or AWS Lambda for serverless computing. It has its own value separately but API Gateway is interconnected with the broader Amazon service ecosystem. I would overall rate it an eight out of ten. 

All of my APIs and microservices are behind the Amazon API Gateway. When someone sends a request to the API Gateway, it performs validation and then forwards it to the appropriate microservice. Several microservices, such as payment services, deposit services, and account services, are all behind the API Gateway.

For me, there are many valuable features. The solution is a managed service and requires minimal configuration, which makes it easy to launch an API. Moreover, there is support for analytics and configuration options for volume, security, rate limits, and more.

I would like to improve the restrictions and security elements of the solution, as there are certain configurations that are not currently supported. There are certain restrictions that cannot be implemented without web access.

In the next release, I would like a feature that can validate requests and filter out any jQuery injections. Additionally, I would like to prioritize these requests. I've noticed that such features are usually not available in web applications.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for three years.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. Although, scalability depends on the type of APIs being deployed, security, and the market.

For example, it depends on the type of APIs being deployed and the volume of calls to the APIs. The number of concurrent users also impacts scalability. Our company has around 4,000 to 5,000 concurrent users per year and sometimes up to 10,000 to 15,000. However, I haven't tested the scalability of the API Gateway for that volume of calls.

The support team is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It took only a day to deploy the solution. You can do it with the help of documentation, anyone can easily configure the setup.

The ROI of Amazon API Gateway depends on the type of API being deployed. If you are monetizing your API, then the calculation is different. However, if you are using the API gateway for your own business services, you should consider the ROI in terms of the cost of developing a similar service on your own. This way, you can determine if the investment in the API gateway is worth it. If the cost of developing the service on your own is higher than the cost of using the API gateway, then the ROI will be great.

The licensing model is based on the number of pay calls made. It was not expensive.

If I take into consideration the past three to four years, during which I used the tool, I would say that some missing and external configurations were not possible in the product, and it was a bit difficult to manage.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for more than five years. I am an implementer of the tool. I am a solution architect, specifically an enterprise architect whose role is to provide the best solution for organizations based on their requirements.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven or eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

My company's clients consist of medium-sized businesses that are looking for a solution.

Considering the time zone differences, there were times when my company had to wait for a day to get a response from the support team. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was difficult.

There was one more team in my company that was involved with AWS and the DevOps team, who were used to struggling with the product's initial setup process. As a solution architect, I found the product's initial setup process difficult.

The solution is deployed on a public cloud.

If you just take into consideration the application part during the setup process, it can be managed in minutes.

The product can be described as a medium-priced solution, but its cost is higher than Azure.

I am involved in the process of integrating Amazon API Gateway with microservices architecture.

I use REST for Amazon API Gateway.

Speaking about how Amazon API Gateway's caching feature has an impact on API performance, I would say that my company has its own caching mechanism written in Java. Even in AWS, our company uses a caching feature.

In terms of the product's authorization and access control features, I would say that there is a component in AWS that we can use. Among the three projects my company handles, for one of the projects, we used LDAP for authorization. In one of the projects handled by our company, we have used AWS as a component.

All the features of the product are good, but it all depends on the end users who need to accept the solution. If you you ask me, the cloud solutions are very good, irrespective of whether users go for AWS, Azure, or GCP.

Considering the monitoring and analytics feature in Amazon API Gateway, I would say that my company used the tool for analytics along with Microsoft, which we recently used for Spring Boot Actuator since it provides production-ready features, including health check metrics. My company also uses a third-party API for analytics purposes.

The monitoring and analytics feature in Amazon API Gateway was the reason I implemented microservices on AWS in some of my earlier projects with a different company. Presently, I work for the Ministry of Interior of Qatar, and we now want to move to microservices. I was involved in doing some research to figure out whether to choose Spring Boot or MicroProfile, an open-source service for microservices.

The product is really good when it comes to API lifecycle management, and it is not just something that includes the balancing part or the security aspect but also the routing and the fallback mechanism.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it. When you go for a cloud solution, the main advantage is that users can choose not to have an infrastructure, where they may have to opt for a pay-as-you-go model. For small and medium-sized organizations, AWS, Azure, or GCP are fine. In my case, since I have an extensive database, I think it is good to go with Amazon API Gateway.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use the solution for API management. I use Amazon API Gateway for SQL Server Stretch Database.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a stable solution with an uptime of 99.99 percent.

Amazon API Gateway is expensive, making it one of the product's shortcomings where improvements are required.

Amazon API Gateway needs to focus on minimizing latency.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for a year.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Around ten employees in my company use the solution.

Considering that my organization is closed as of now, I can't comment on whether there are plans to increase the use of the solution in the company.

I have experience with the solution's technical support.

Apart from the cloud services offered by Amazon and Google, our company has not used any other products.

The product's initial setup phase was not complex.

At first, my company needed to deal with Amazon's authentication requirements, after which we put all our information in Amazon API Gateway. Then, we run the setup file and add the attribute data before we can finally operate it in our company.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The solution can be deployed in two hours.

Five technicians are sufficient to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

My company sought an integrator's help to carry out the product's installation process.

The solution is expensive. Though the product was previously available at a cheap rate, nowadays it is expensive.

Amazon is the number one cloud service provider in the world.

I recommend the solution to others since it is a good product.

The benefit that I have experienced from using the solution stems from the fact that it is a secure and reliable product to use.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

We mainly use these APIs for east-to-west communication within our internal system and partner collaboration. While most companies prefer tool-based API management for partner collaboration, for internal consumption, and integration between application insight, we tend to use cloud-native tools provided by AWS.

The most valuable features are the standard ones that APIs offer. Depending on the requirements, Azure API management's throttling feature is used for continuous consumption. Otherwise, we rely on the default features available. 

Since it is mainly for internal communication, we haven't received any concerns or requests for better tools or additional features. The initial tools provided by Amazon API Gateway suffice for our needs.

The only issue we've noticed is a lack of awareness when it comes to partner collaboration. Customers prefer using separate API gateways for scalability. Apart from that, feature-wise, most API management solutions offer similar features and learning resources on how to use them.

The pricing could be improved. In cases where customers require real-time sync or real-time calling groups with IoT, the volume of data and time lag become a concern. AWS charges for data ingress and egress, which could be further reduced. This would be helpful for customers dealing with large amounts of data coming in or going out from their systems. So, improving pricing for volume data transfer is something that can be considered, as it has been consistent feedback from customers.

It has been around four years since it became publicly available. We have tier-one partnerships with all the hyperscalers, including AWS, Azure, and GCP. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. It is very scalable, and we don't need to hire additional engineers.

Our clients are primarily enterprise businesses. We have a strong customer base in log integrations.

The support is good, especially if you are a premium partner with AWS or have active scalable support. If you have a tier-one partnership, the support has been phenomenal. 

However, if the partnership is lower, it may take more time or have SLAs involved. But overall, the support team is more receptive than the infrastructure team. 

Positive

Currently, we mainly focus on cloud-native solutions. We have a couple of partnerships, including Dell Boomi and MuleSoft. We also had a customer requirement for Apigee design, so I was looking for a comparison between API management with cloud-native tools and their offerings. 

Generally, we recommend using API management provided by the Hyperscale industry, such as AWS, Azure, and GCP Virtual Desktop.

The initial setup is straightforward. With big data forms and CI/CD automation, it becomes very straightforward.

Most of the time, we have seen hybrid and cloud deployments being preferred by our customers. That has been the dominant use case for most of them.

The Amazon configuration IT process usually takes a couple of hours. If the requirements are clear and there are no additional requests from the customer's side, it's just a matter of a couple of hours to set up the new components for straightforward and simple requirements.

The pricing can be expensive depending on the use case. If there is a lot of data processing involved, it can become a costly solution. However, it is still better than other products available in the market. Since our customers are mostly large enterprises, they prefer not to go for open-source alternatives or cheaper limited services. They prefer to stick with what is available with the Hyperscale providers.

We use API tools from Amazon, Azure, and sometimes GCP depending on where the customer workloads are. For Azure, we use Azure EDP management, and for Amazon, we use generative VPN management. Most of our requirements revolve around Azure APM management and AWS APM engine.

The features we look at are mostly similar across the board. There aren't many differentiating factors. For example, in terms of orchestration, Azure offers step functions or Lambda functions, which are available in AWS as well. 

The customers tend to use the native features unless they need to work with different API gateways for scalability reasons. The only issue we've noticed is a lack of awareness when it comes to partner collaboration. Customers prefer using separate API gateways for scalability. Apart from that, feature-wise, most API management solutions offer similar features and learning resources on how to use them.

We would definitely recommend sticking to native solutions because then you have one Hyperscale provider supporting the applications, storage, compute, and APIs. 

Another aspect to consider is the security features within the API. If you need to collaborate outside the organization, there are numerous security features available through the Hyperscale provider that can be leveraged. 

However, if there is a very specific requirement that the native API Gateway doesn't fulfill, then you can explore other external products or solutions.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use Amazon API Gateway to expose some APIs. I worked for three companies that mostly used API Gateway for exposed services and complex use cases like expose headers. The solution is used to personalize responses, provide more simulations, and facilitate communication between the services. The solution is also used to direct some requests to Lambda and ECS.

Amazon API Gateway can integrate with ECS and Lambda. With Amazon API Gateway, you can have massive integrations that are quickly integrated.

Amazon API Gateway is not as complete as Apigee and needs to be improved by adding more features to become a more robust application.

For some use cases, Apigee is more complete than Amazon API Gateway. With Apigee, you can integrate some endpoints with better latency. Apigee has the cloud EPG Microgateway resource, which can be put inside our Kubernetes cluster. Integration with Apigee can have more efficiency in terms of latency. Apigee is an enterprise architecture application wherein you can use a proxy.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

Amazon API Gateway is a good solution that works well most of the time. With Amazon API Gateway, I've not encountered unavailability or any issue that became a disaster.

You don't need to worry about the scalability of Amazon API Gateway because AWS takes responsibility for the solution's scalability.

I opened some tickets for use cases integrating with Lambda, and the technical support was very good. Most companies I work with use an enterprise plan from AWS. You open a chat, have your response, know what to do or what is wrong, and can resolve the problem. Amazon API Gateway's technical support is very efficient.

Positive

I have experience with Apigee.

Amazon API Gateway is very easy to set up. You can create a platform template using ChatGPT or write one with your hands.

My first Amazon API Gateway deployment took five to ten minutes. My boss requested me to expose the Lambda for internal use cases. I didn't have any experience with Amazon API Gateway at that moment, but I was able to expose the API, which was very, very easy.

In my previous company, they had a lot of people responsible for the solution's maintenance. Developers are responsible for personalizing the configurations inside Amazon API Gateway. They need to understand the requirements of the API and maximize site API. At that moment, I was responsible for having the permissions and putting the information in Amazon API Gateway. We need two or three people responsible for around 30 APIs and some developers.

Since it's a serverless solution, Amazon API Gateway is not so expensive. The pricing depends on the number of requests you have in your API, but it is adjustable. Amazon API Gateway is very good in terms of price because other solutions have a specific key price you need to pay monthly. However, with Amazon API Gateway, you pay for what you use.

If you use minimum requests inside Amazon API Gateway, you have to pay one to five dollars. However, if you have a lot of APIs, you have to pay $ 200 to $ 500. The pricing depends on how many requests you have.

If you use AWS services, do not hesitate to go for Amazon API Gateway. If you are not using AWS or if you are not AWS cloud-native, you can consider using other solutions like Apigee or Kong. If you are looking to have a serverless application, then you need to use it again.

Overall, I rate Amazon API Gateway an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as an API gateway. The APIs are managed by serverless applications. It's an API gateway from Layer 7.

The integration with Comdata is very good.

The product is affordable.

It is easy to set up. It is also quick to deploy.

The solution is reliable. It is very stable. 

The solution can scale well. 

The solution could improve signature validation. They should offer signature validation if there is any request. There needs to be some sort of mechanism. They need to be able to validate the signature at the API gateway level. 

I've used the solution for about three years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. There are no improvements needed. The performance is good. 

The solution is scalable. There's no problem if we need to expand. We have around 600 APIs working right now. We have plans to increase usage in the future. 

I did not use any other solution previously.

There are multiple ways to set up the solution. It's very simple and straightforward. 

The deployment shouldn't take too long, depending on the requirements. We can do it in just a minute. The work is very minimal. 

First, we set up the routes and set them up with the network, and in terms of integration, if there are any authentications needed, we do that as well. 

We do not need many staff members to handle deployment and maintenance. 

We can handle the setup ourselves. It's very easy.

We've seen value in using the solution. It is worth the money. 

The licensing is paid monthly. It's a minimal charge. It is very affordable. There are no extra costs. 

We did not evaluate other options. 

I am an end-user.

I've been using the latest version of the solution. 

I highly recommend the product. 

I'd rate the product ten out of ten.