Amazon API Gateway Reviews

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 use Amazon API Gateway for some solutions we have integrated with ServiceNow. Some operations need to be done with the help of Amazon API Gateway. If API Gateway's path is available, we can easily integrate it with other solutions.

Amazon API Gateway is a very fast solution.

The solution has a major limitation compared to Google Cloud. Amazon API Gateway will wait for only 30 seconds to get a response from other services, such as the Lambda function. API Gateway can be directly integrated with the Lambda function, and a response from the Lambda function must be obtained within 30 seconds.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for five years.

I am satisfied with the solution’s stability.

We are using the solution for three to four projects by big clients.

I am satisfied with the solution’s technical support.

It is easy to install because we use a third-party tool called Serverless to define the Amazon API Gateway path. We are integrating the API gateway with the Lambda proxy on the back end. All the things are written in the Serverless file in YAML format. We are using Serverless to deploy on the cloud automatically.

All authentication mechanisms, like the access key and secret key, can be configured in the corresponding machine. It will then be authenticated against the access key and security key, and it will be automatically deployed on that particular account.

The solution's pricing is cheap and based on the number of requests coming to Amazon API Gateway.

Since the deployment should be automatic, it's better to use the Serverless tool to deploy the solution. Otherwise, you can use Terraform. Manually creating something will be a problem. It is easy for somebody to learn to use API Gateway for the first time. When we integrate Amazon API Gateway with any other service like Lambda, there will be a log associated with it, which you can find out.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use Amazon API Gateway to expose our back end to the front end.

The best thing about Amazon API Gateway is that it can authenticate and authorize requests without going to our back end. We can use the solution to authenticate a request. It has a time out of 30 seconds, wherein it will show time out if any request takes more than 30 seconds.

We can create many sub-resources in a single resource. Instead of creating five resources for five APIs, we can create five sub-resources in only one resource. I love working with Amazon API Gateway because it is very user-friendly.

I faced issues with the timeout because some machine-learning scripts would take more than 30 seconds. Since the first invocation of AWS Lambda takes more than 30 seconds because of Lambda's cold start, Amazon API Gateway blocks that resource, thereby aborting the invocation.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for two years.

Amazon API Gateway is a highly stable product.

More than ten people are using the solution in our organization.

The solution’s technical support is good.

Amazon API Gateway is a very cheaply priced product.

It is very easy for a beginner to learn to use Amazon API Gateway and to create some resources manually. You can download one CDK script to create that same resource in any other environment a second time.

Amazon API Gateway is a serverless product. We don't need to manage servers. We only need to create the resources that we need to create. It is a completely deployed product. We create our AWS account, and we can create APIs directly. We don't need to worry about servers.

Setting up the authorization and authentication mechanism with Amazon API Gateway is very easy and takes only half an hour. We are actively migrating from on-premises to AWS or any other cloud. We will have a very big use case for Amazon API Gateway in the future.

You should be very specific with the configuration if you are a new user. Initially, you should have a very simple configuration and not use a proxy. If you have a use case to expose the Amazon API gateway to any front-end resources, you have to allow CORS and set headers. Be specific with the headers and CORS configuration, and don't make it complex. Don't jump directly into advanced configuration.

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

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.

Neutral

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.

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.

Our use case is we have some internal APIs that we need to expose to the outside world. Via API Gateway, we expose those APIs to the external world.

It is easy for integrations if it is deployed in AWS Services.

The setup is very simple. 

It is stable and reliable.

It can scale well.

We would like to see more UI-based monitoring.

I've been using API Gateway for around six months.

It's a stable, reliable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We can scale the product. it's not a problem if we need to expand it. 

The solution was just recently deployed. We have about 1,000 new users on it. When were are fully operational, we will have about 10,000 users on the solution. We are still in the process of expanding usage. 

We've never had to reach out to technical support. Therefore, I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We also use Apigee from Google. 

We didn't switch from anything. This was a new requirement. Since all of our components are in AWS, we took the AWS API Gateway solution to make it easy for integration for all other AWS components.

The solution offers an easy initial setup. 

It takes two weeks to deploy the solution. 

We only need about two individuals to handle any maintenance tasks. We may need up to six people once we are fully up and running. We'll need one manager, two administrators, and two people for support.

We did the implementation in-house. We did not need outside assistance from consultants or integrators. We had people on our team that could do it.

We did evaluate other options before choosing this solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. If you are using AWS components, then it is a good product.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten.

My use case for Amazon API Gateway involves using it for backend APIs and mostly private API Gateways. We utilize it within the context of a microservices architecture. The front-end technology connects through the API Gateway to backend services running on Lambda, making the API Gateway an endpoint for reaching backend services.

Amazon API Gateway provides easy scalability and fast deployment, making it less time-consuming to spin up services. Its serverless technology allows our applications to scale seamlessly according to demand.

A most valuable feature of Amazon API Gateway is how quickly we can connect to backend services and have APIs accessible from anywhere. This flexibility supports our operations efficiently.

I'd appreciate improvements in the user interface to make it more understandable, especially for new AWS users. Documentation can be confusing at times, so more details on the connection between the API Gateway and backend services would be helpful. Additionally, a local version of the API Gateway would be beneficial for testing purposes without incurring extra costs.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for almost two and a half years now.

Amazon API Gateway has proven to be very stable, with a stability rating of ten out of ten. The high stability ensures that we do not encounter workflow issues, which is critical for maintaining uninterrupted operations.

Regarding scalability, I would rate Amazon API Gateway at eight out of ten. Although we have not faced challenges, we have not tested scalability on a large scale either. In our typical use cases, scalability aligns with our expectations and requirements.

The support from AWS was adequate when we needed assistance, particularly during the setup of a private API Gateway. There was initial difficulty due to unclear documentation, but the AWS team's help was effective, even though it took some time to get the correct answers.

Neutral

The initial setup was moderately complex; I would rate it a six out of ten. Understanding the service's intricacies and integration with Lambda was the major challenge initially, but it became easier over time.

The deployment process typically involves only one person, which is myself. Maintenance does not require many people due to its serverless nature.

The pricing of Amazon API Gateway is cost-effective unless there is a very high volume of requests. I would rate the pricing as reasonable, giving it a score of five out of ten.

For newcomers to Amazon API Gateway, it's advisable to watch a few AWS videos to grasp how it works. The documentation can be difficult to follow initially, so supplementing it with external learning resources can provide a better understanding.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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.