Likelihood to Recommend It is really helpful for managing [the] scaling of systems with need and utilizing resources when needed. Also, DevOps support for deployment plans is quite useful when deploying applications. Monitoring systems with graphQL and utilizing them in APIs is quite helpful when used in Microservices systems to identify system capabilities and user utilization of applications.
Read full review Experienced a lack of available programming languages while working on a minor project. I had to halt the project and wait for it to be added later. It took ages and had a hit on our productivity. It has a centralized management system which helps and an easy interface which helps to manage multiple tasks in case of large-scale operations and projects.
Read full review Pros Graphically representation in GraphQL Scaling system DevOps management Read full review 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. Read full review Cons Quota enforcement can be simplified Caching mechanism for API with akamai can be improved Gateway configuration can be simplified as details are not much elaborate Read full review Client certificates are troublesome when trying to attach them to API GW stages. Debugging across several services can be difficult when API GW is integrated with Route 53 and another service like Lambda or EC2/ELB. Creating internal/private APIs, particularly with custom domains, can be unintuitive. Read full review Support Rating 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.
Read full review Alternatives Considered Akamai [API Gateway] helps better in terms of representation of graphQL and its consumption in monitoring system making a package for deployment speed with monitoring and scaling application with all services and utilizing most of a system without much knowledge of other aspects. Also, [a] user-friendly system helps people to handle [the] system with necessary options
Read full review When we tested
Azure API Management at the time, it had serious connectivity issues, it was very unstable, and it needed to do a lot using the command line. Comparing with the AWS solution, which was more mature, and the fact that we have services in use on AWS, we ended up choosing to continue using AWS products. This so as not to run the risk of increasing latency in accesses, and of some functionality not working, due to being developed yet.
Read full review Return on Investment Decrease in time required for deployment and monitoring by significant amount causing less support resources needed Scaling applications on month-end at high usage time has reduced TAT time for issues and no of issues occurring Quota enforcement has allowed [managing] multiple systems and their needs in respective stakeholders hands and reduced infra teams involvement in [the] management of reoccurring problems Read full review ROI is negative, you need either to hire them to work with you or spend days/weeks to figure out issues. For some of the projects in the end it is not worth it, it is just a "buzz" to use serverless but not practical. Service is easy to set up authorization and it is easy to manage. Read full review ScreenShots