Amazon API Gateway Reviews

We are dealing more with Amazon these days, primarily because AWS, being a cloud service provider, offers many services on both the data side and the services side. We are using a few services of AWS, including data pipelines.

The tools by Amazon that we work with mostly include EC2, which is the first and foremost compute service we use a lot, as it serves as the prime backbone of any computations in enterprise systems. For data systems, we generally take S3 as the primary and primitive data lake, and we also use API services, Redshift, EMR, SageMaker, and Athena based on customer solutions.

We are working with Amazon API Gateway, mostly using it with Lambda services.

Regarding built-in authorization, monitoring is quite substantial, and versioning systems is also what we are using. With Amazon API Gateway, we utilize a variety of deployment methods and services they provide, so monitoring services are the important parameter in API control from our side, allowing us to see how the APIs behave and how well they pick up the data from their respective sources.

Integration with AWS Lambda has been beneficial since we have event controllers that help identify the APIs, which then call the API from the API services. We're managing this with events that are parameterized through API identification, mostly using Python in Lambda, which has inbuilt features to track API lifecycle parameters.

The defined parameterized features in Amazon API Gateway help streamline API lifecycle management. Our AWS system admin team sets these configurations for us. The versioning number gets updated as we deploy revised API versions, which gets monitored on the API monitoring services. The cloud engineering team assists us as we are from a solutions development and deployment team.

The importance of Amazon API Gateway's global API deployment for our application's performance is significant in terms of scalability and availability. Amazon API Gateway services have been very good, maintaining a 99.99 SLA, providing us confidence in the global deployment level as it is capable of handling various endpoint types, such as database sites and legacy systems.

If you ask what I would improve in Amazon API Gateway, I would suggest the need for an audit trail based on user credentials.

An audit trail and audit stamps managed at the API level to control API movement would be beneficial. With many AI solutions emerging that determine who is calling the API and whether authorization or need is present, having that integrated into Amazon API Gateway services would be a great improvement.

As of now, the audit trail is the main point I truly think would significantly improve the API services.

I started working with Amazon API Gateway at least six years back, around 2019-2020. Of late, because we have also moved into Azure services and are significantly into AI solutions, I see a slight reduction in our consumption of Amazon API Gateway over the past year. However, I have been working with the gateway services for some time now.

I would rate technical support at around 8.5 to 9 on a scale of one to ten. The professional services from AWS have been good, and although there may have been some communication issues, that might have been on our side as we didn't require much support due to well-maintained SLAs.

Positive

Before using Amazon API Gateway, I did not work with anything similar in a cloud environment. However, I used APIs for many years in my lifetime, primarily through method calls integrated with RPC protocols.

The initial setup of Amazon API Gateway is straightforward. Compared to the old days of creating our own gateway services and connecting with RPC or UPI protocols, Amazon API Gateway is a self-contained solution, and it works well.

You can proceed with your questions about Amazon API Gateway, and I will try to answer if I have the knowledge. Regarding pricing, I think it is reasonable considering the kind of work it does for us. Overall, I would rate Amazon API Gateway as a product a nine because I appreciate that product. My overall review rating for this product is nine out of ten.

We are using API Gateway to route the traffic to our Lambdas. Every API pass is linked to some of the Lambdas. When traffic hits CloudFront, it redirects it to API Gateway, which then redirects it to the respective Lambda server. We have different kinds of services invoked through these Lambdas.

When we shifted to the serverless model, many responsibilities, such as patching the servers and taking care of backups, are managed by AWS. This reduces our overhead.

The Lambda features are very cost-effective since you do not have to run your servers 24/7. This allows us to manage our business applications in a cost-effective way.

There are features lacking in API Gateway, such as the timeout settings, which currently are set at 29 seconds. If the API Gateway doesn't get a response within that time, it results in a timeout. These parameters should depend upon the use cases.

In my current project, we have been using API Gateway for approximately four and a half years. I personally have been using it for about two years.

The solution is highly available. We haven't faced any major stability issues from AWS's end. Our applications are stable, owing partly to our architecture, which is spread across three regions. Even if one region goes down, users can still access the application.

The scalability of the product is very flexible and dependent on various factors. If the business management agrees to scale out, it's easy and fast using coded infrastructure with Terraform scripts. However, we encountered a hard limit on API development which requires strong justification for increasing it.

Support depends on the severity level impacting the business. With the enterprise plan, there is a set SLA. We typically use the chat option and see a response time of about ten minutes.

Positive

The initial setup requires prior experience with cloud services. If you have experience, it is straightforward. Otherwise, it can be challenging, and referring to documentation is necessary.

In terms of pricing, I do not have exact figures since a separate cloud FinOps division handles it. However, my understanding is that it easily goes to $14,000 or $15,000 USD each month for each account, and we have several such accounts.

Whenever developing APIs, be mindful of the limits, such as hard limits on the number of APIs you can develop within a region. Communicating with AWS support can provide solutions, but understanding architectural constraints is crucial.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I have been engaged in a project where we used Amazon API Gateway to secure on-premise APIs and expose them to the external world.

There are certain setup settings that need to be done in terms of network configuration for Amazon API Gateway, as certain APIs need to be exposed first, which requires multiple settings to be configured.

Implementing Amazon API Gateway fully usually takes around 2 to 3 weeks for the setup configuration; the development team then comes in to configure and expose the APIs to the external entities.

The best features of Amazon API Gateway include security and metering, which involves the analytical part of how the APIs are being consumed since it's for consumer APIs built for use by other applications.

The benefits include direct integration with Lambda, allowing us to build small use-case functions that can be called through Amazon API Gateway and exposed via it.

The access control features enhance the security of our APIs, and I would like to understand more from that aspect.

I don't have any additional features in mind right now, but I would like to see some Copilot for API Gateway integration, which would assist in diagnosing issues or performance.

I am still evaluating a new solution, as I'm not using any software yet.

We haven't faced major challenges, but we did experience a threshold hit where APIs bottlenecked under multiple requests during load testing while delivering to customers. The AWS team helped us with the appropriate configuration on their side.

I have only managed APIs for web applications using Amazon API Gateway, not for mobile applications, because there was an integration specifically with web applications only.

I have not tried the API caching feature of Amazon API Gateway.

I would rate the technical support by Amazon as good because issues we faced were resolved within a day or two, while support from Microsoft or other cloud providers typically takes about a week.

I would rate the Amazon technical support as 8 to 9 out of 10.

Positive

I have worked with AWS and certain services from AWS, but not others such as Sophos.

I would say Amazon API Gateway is a bit costly, but considering the feature level, it is very good.

While there are other options, we propose based on what suits best for our customers' tech stack.

I have experience with Nintex and K2, but I do not have experience with Unqork. I am specialized in Microsoft products such as Power Automate and Power Apps.

I have knowledge of Microsoft Intune and Defender, along with certain Azure components. I work for an organization as a presales architect, proposing solutions to customers.

I am familiar with Microsoft Defender for Identity, for Business, and for IoT, though I haven't worked extensively on that. I have a conceptually good understanding of it.

I'm mostly working on Microsoft collaboration tools, which include SharePoint and Power Platform tools. I have been dealing mostly with Microsoft, but also with other vendors.

Regarding database services, we typically use SQL server services. We have not used Amazon RDS; typically, we use PostgreSQL or MySQL. On the Azure side, I work with Azure Database services including PostgreSQL, MySQL, and SQL Cosmos.

I was previously working as an architect for U3Soft and am currently working with Birlasoft (B I R L A S O F T).

My overall rating for Amazon API Gateway is 8 out of 10.

We are using API Gateway for exposing our APIs to external organizations. We use it to secure our APIs and as a jump server type, so that all the APIs are exposed or published from one particular source, which is the API Gateway.

From my perspective of ease of use, it is very good. API Gateway is very simple since it's just clicks and we get it. We have a pay-as-you-go model. The payment is a little bit on the costlier side when I look at the amount we have to pay. It is good but costly. I think authorization should not have any issues.

The price could be lower. I would have to get back to you for other improvements, as I haven't identified much else. My team has not highlighted any issues in the past six months apart from the price.

I have been working with API Gateway for around six to seven months.

Stability is excellent. I would give it a ten out of ten since I haven't experienced any downtime.

Scalability is very good. I would give it a ten out of ten.

We have not directly approached Amazon for support. We use Rackspace as an intermediate, and we've been happy with their support.

Neutral

F5 has a pretty good solution. The problem with Amazon AWS is that it's purely cloud-based, so we don't have it on-premises. F5 and other on-premises solutions provide flexibility that Amazon doesn't.

The setup is simple. I don't need very complicated experts. Even someone with an L1 experience can set up API Gateway. This is a significant functionality.

The configuration is handled by the cloud team, and they do it from the security perspective. Authorization is done by my team.

The payment for API Gateway is a little costly, especially for downloads. However, the ease of use is excellent.

Google and Azure both have similar solutions. For on-premises, F5 offers API functionalities that are comparable.

I would recommend Amazon API Gateway to others, but it depends on their specific needs. 

The overall rating is eight out of ten mainly because of the high cost.

Our primary use case involves working on the cloud side, specifically using AWS serverless components, CI/CD pipelines, data storage with S3 buckets, and databases like MySQL, DynamoDB, and DocDB. Additionally, we use API Gateway for REST API development, SageMaker for machine learning model training, and more.

My experience shows that API Gateway provides a secure endpoint for customers using OAuth 2, integrates seamlessly, and enhances customer access to services and product information.

API Gateway is easy to set up, allows for custom domain assignment and rate limiting based on customer tiers, and works well for defining different states for different customers based on their purchase plans.

When using APIs, the manual bit for intermediate confirmation with VTL can be a challenge. It's an Ajax-like implementation which makes it difficult to debug if errors occur.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for five years.

Amazon API Gateway is a stable product. I would rate its stability as nine out of ten.

In terms of scalability, you need to add components like CloudFront if it deals with static data. I rate its scalability at seven out of ten.

Amazon's support team provides clues, but they are not always experts. Understanding the specific business context can be challenging, especially when using multiple accounts.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward and not complex, provided the use case is well defined.

Amazon API Gateway is not expensive. However, costs can increase based on data volume, request types, and business case complexity.

It's important to use API Gateway with caution, ensuring SSL security for requests and considering the business problem, data nature, and request type before implementation.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have all the calls to our servers through API Gateway. We use API Gateway at the front, and everything else is hidden behind the firewall. API Gateway routes calls to our servers. We use API Gateway for our calling solutions.

API Gateway is out of the box and works well with Amazon products. It handles security and other headaches, keeping our database and servers secure. Moreover, it's easy to integrate with Amazon products.

API Gateway could improve by allowing debugging capabilities, particularly when dealing with high volumes. At scale, it is expensive, and latency sometimes occurs. Using CloudWatch for logging and debugging requires additional configuration, whereas other solutions like Kong might offer these out-of-the-box.

I have been using API Gateway for about three years.

I would rate the stability as eight out of ten. It is quite stable.

Scalability isn't the primary issue but rather performance at high volumes can cause latency.

Technical support is excellent, deserving a ten out of ten rating. There are no issues with support.

Positive

We used Kong in previous labs before using Amazon API Gateway.

Setup is straightforward, and it is easy to maintain.

Our ROI is close to fifty percent. API Gateway saves time and secures my infrastructure, allowing effective deployment.

API Gateway is pricey. I would rate the pricing as nine out of ten. It is expensive.

Besides Amazon API Gateway, we have used Kong Gateway, and we also utilize EC2 for other purposes.

The product rates at nine out of ten as an overall solution.

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.

We primarily use it for real-time use cases where we have used Lambda with the API Gateway. So, the backend is a Lambda server. We are implementing a serverless architecture with the API Gateway. 

We've implemented risk score models within the Lambda. Thus, whenever someone requires a risk assessment for a prospect in need of a loan, they access our Amazon API Gateway. In the backend, it triggers the Lambda service.

So, within the Lambda, our ML model predicts whether the customer falls into the high-risk or low-risk category. Then, it sends a response to our frontend application, which is an Android-based application.

Currently, our use cases are relatively simple. Even though we host ten different models, the use cases are similar. We have configured the API gateway for various URLs and receive hits from different services like tractors, two-wheelers, and mobiles. 

The most valuable aspects are its user-friendliness and simplicity. These two features make it easy to work with. 

Additionally, it's cost-effective, even as our workload and the number of APIs we manage have increased. 

The integration with other API services, such as Lambda, EC2, and Kubernetes, is also incredibly useful.

The main concern is connectivity. When someone requests a mobile score, we need to query the backend DB using prospect numbers. This involves going from AWS to the Oracle DB in Oracle Cloud, fetching data through SQL queries, and then feeding it back to the model running on AWS. This process takes a considerable amount of time.

It's like dealing with connectivity issues because of the direct connection. Although I find AWS API Gateway better than Oracle in many aspects, the network connectivity challenges force us to consider using Oracle API Gateway for our new product, LOS (Load Origination System). This new product will involve extensive interaction with the databases, and we cannot afford network connectivity issues. This is the only drawback I've encountered.

Even though AWS API Gateway is better in several respects, we are leaning towards Oracle API Gateway due to its compatibility with our Oracle backend databases. Traditionally, enterprise databases are Oracle databases, and that's why we work with Oracle Cloud. We're also exploring MuleSoft, which offers a wide range of features and services, although cost is a concern.

I have been using this solution for three to four years. 

Stability-wise, I haven't come across any challenges. I'd rate it a solid ten.

In terms of scalability, I haven't encountered any issues with API Gateway. We've significantly increased our traffic from hitting it once or twice a minute to now hitting it ten to fifteen times within a minute. In an hour, we're receiving hundreds of hits. So, it's performing excellently.

We did require technical support recently, but it was related to Lambda rather than the API Gateway. We were facing issues with response times on our requests. Whenever we raised a support request (SR), the response was swift. Within 15 minutes, we had a support engineer allocated via Amazon, and we were able to resolve the issue promptly.  The support was really fast and prompt. 

Positive

We're using both Amazon and Oracle API Gateway. We need to decide which one to use for our iOS application since our backend DBs are in Oracle.  So, I work with both. Our cloud is on Amazon, and our backend development is in Oracle Cloud.

The initial setup is very simple. It takes around five minutes to deploy an API. It is very simple. 

I would rate the pricing nine out of ten, with one being expensive and ten being less price, leaning towards cost-effective.

We primarily use Amazon products because they align well with the solutions provided by our third-party vendors. This allows us to keep our data within our cloud while ensuring seamless integration without exposing sensitive information.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. There's room for enhancements. Currently, API Gateway lacks some governance features that MuleSoft offers, and there are additional features that could make it even better.

I use the solution in my company to develop AWS Lambda services. My company uses Amazon API Gateway to expose AWS Lambda functions and explore our APIs. I use the product to manage microservices.

As a tool, Amazon API gateway works well. I believe that there could be more features associated with analytics since it is an area where the product lacks. If it is possible to get analytics automatically from Amazon API Gateway, it would be a great feature or add-on.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for four years. I use the solution as a customer.

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

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

I have not experienced or seen the product going down or responding late.

It takes time for me to get in touch with the support team and for them to respond to my queries. The support team does help once I am able to get in touch with them. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I rate the deployment phase as two on a scale of one to ten, where one means that it is an easy process while ten means it is a difficult phase.

The solution can be deployed in ten to fifteen minutes.

Based on whatever documentation I had seen related to the pricing part of the product in our company, I feel that the price of the product is decent. I rate the tool's price as seven on a scale of one to ten, where one means low price and ten means high price. There is a need to make early payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. My company has an entire suite of products containing AWS products.

Amazon API Gateway serves as a key component that works effectively in our company's serverless architecture. My company uses the product to ensure that we do not expose AWS Lambda to the outside world. In our company, we also use the product's services to protect the API calls.

Request, rate limit, and response validation are some of the most crucial features in API development, deployment, and management. Ease of development and areas involving AWS CodePipeline are also some of the important features attached to Amazon API Gateway.

The API caching feature was very effective in improving our company's API performance. The response has always been good whenever we have used the product's API caching feature in our company. Whenever we need something less sensitive, we prefer to use the tool's API caching feature.

In terms of security features, our company uses API keys and tokens for client credentials flow so that we can authenticate the calls to Amazon API Gateway. There are no concerns about the tool's security features.

The product is easy to maintain. My company hasn't researched the need for multi-region maintenance. When it comes to the multi-region maintenance phase, there could be some complexities involved. In my experience, the maintenance of the product is easy. One person is good enough to maintain the product.

Integrating Amazon API Gateway with other services or products is very easy, especially with the other AWS services or products I use. In general, I find the product's integration capabilities to be easy and straightforward.

If you want to integrate any of the services within AWS and expose your data, Amazon API Gateway is a good way to do it. I definitely recommend others use AWS Serverless Computing and Amazon API Gateway together.

I rate the overall tool a ten 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.