Amazon API Gateway vs. SwaggerHub

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

We use SwaggerHub to design API endpoint and documentation for our microservices architecture system. It's working really great for us to be able to collaborate more easily on developing API in our team. It also can test our API endpoint which makes an integration test easier when we deploy changes to the API, especially for non-developers/QA.

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

• Treating the design as documentation ensures that we have consistent and well defined APIs
• API consumers can export the swagger definition or code stubs to use within their development environment
• We can iterate through multiple versions of a definition privately before making a version publicly available

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

• Swagger Editor can be bit more user friendly by providing the means to persist different projects as part of user profiles
• Swagger UI's testing capability or means to test APIs can be improved
• Swagger UI clients can be added as part of Spring ecosystem

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

We have had SwaggerHub for as long as I have been with the company, so I am not sure why SwaggerHub was selected compared to other similar tools

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

• Faster API development lifecycle.
• Reduced discussion time when building a new vital API endpoint.
• Complete documentation which makes the new team member onboarding process easier.

Incentivized