I'm fairly new to spring cloud gateway and I am thinking of using it as a main gateway to my application.
I was wondering if Spring cloud gateway provides the capability to monitor health of the gateway (and also monitor the health of the microservices that have the /health endpoint)?
Also i'm wondering if Spring cloud gateway supports API versioning too?
What would be really good is if anyone can point me to the direction where there is sample code that is available for me to try these things out?
Thanks
Related
I am working on a distributed application project where there is need for rate limiting and authentication depending on the client consuming the service on an api gateway. I am wondering the best solution for designing the gateway.
Should I go with Spring cloud gateway or Spring Cloud function/AWS Lambda to create the gateway service?
I'd argue that using AWS API Gateway will make your life easier...
The benefits of using AWS API Gateway are:
it will remove all the operational cost of maintaining, configuring, monitoring and operating a Spring Cloud Gateway instance,
it will be highly available, with failover,
it will give you instant features like rate limiting, api keys, caching, authorization, canary testing, proxying, integration mapping, environments
it is very very cheap ($3.50 x MM requests).
The benefits of using Spring Cloud Function:
Define your API's as code within the application code itself
Leverage the ecosystem integration within Spring, for example, to run it locally on a dev's PC.
Cons of using API Gateway:
Deployment of new API's will be harder than using Spring Cloud Gateway (you need to configure each new resource/method)
Your costs are now tied to the number of requests... if you have a 900.000.000 millons/months API it could get expensive
Vendor lock-in
Cons of using Spring Cloud Function:
Operative cost of maintenance
Single point of failure
You can use Amazon API Gateway.
For more info on request throttling and quotas, please refer to the docs:
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/apigateway/latest/developerguide/api-gateway-request-throttling.html
I will rather use Istio gateway Envoy proxy rather than both options if permitted. Keeping my operational and maintenance cost little and no code change.
I'm implementing a microservices system with Spring Boot, and I want to have a service that using Rsocket to make real-time connecting between user and system. But in the document of Spring Cloud Gateway, that's seem not support Rsocket. Is this possible to using Rsocket in a microservices system with Spring Boot ? Or should I using websocket instead ?
Here is my idea
Don't try this, lost time. See authoritative article
https://spring.io/blog/2020/03/25/spring-tips-spring-cloud-loadbalancer
https://spring.io/guides/gs/spring-cloud-loadbalancer/
https://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-gateway/reference/html/#the-websocket-routing-filter
https://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-gateway/reference/html/#the-loadbalancerclient-filter
https://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-gateway/reference/html/#reactive-loadbalancer-client-filter
For load balancing with Spring Cloud Gateway, let use technology stack [Eureka Discovery Client + Cloud Loadbalancer + Reactive Web] or Ribbon (Netflix Open Source Software - Netflix OSS).
Rsocket for "... Reactive Streams", load balancing need something like request/response round robin, these are different.
In your opinion, in a hybrid architecture (WEBSOCKET + HTTP) is it good practice to use 2 gateways: Zuul for HTTP communication and Spring Cloud Gateway for WEBSOCKET communication in a Spring Boot application? Alternatively, in this scenario is it recommended to use only Spring Cloud Gateway?
Thanks.
is it recommended to use only Spring Cloud Gateway Yes because
Spring Cloud does not provide any out of the box integration with Zuul2. Gateway has many features that are not available in the public version of Zuul2 such as Rate limiting, etc. Also, with the gateway you can have custom filters defined per route and there are tons of built-in filters defined as well, which helps a lot to get started. Reference
Reference: I think SCG is the way to go due to the agreements between Netflix and Pivotal, with the former leaning more toward the spring boot/cloud ecosystem as stated in https://medium.com/netflix-techblog/netflix-oss-and-spring-boot-coming-full-circle-4855947713a0
I have a few synchronous microservices working on production using Spring Boot 2.X version. Soon, we need to implement a gateway if the number of instances of each microservice is going to be increased. I read that Zuul was in a maintenance phase and was replaced by Spring Cloud Gateway which is by default asynchronous technology. My question is, can I still implement Spring Cloud Gateway with my microservices?
Yes, you can use Spring Cloud Gateway without any doubts.
Basically, asynchronous technology means that your resources/threads on Api Gateway won't be blocked waiting for the response from downstream services and that increases a throughput.
Now, once your blocking services complete their internal logic they respond back to Api Gateway using an originally opened connection. Api Gateway in turn responds back to your client.
The setup:
I have a set of Spring Boot based microservices that are fronted by Spring Cloud Gateway, meaning every request that comes from UI or external API client first comes to Spring Cloud Gateway and is then forwarded to appropriate microservice.
The routes are configured in Consul, and Spring Cloud Gateway communicates with Consul to get the routes accordingly.
Requirement:
There is a need of some microservices communicating with each other with REST APIs. I would prefer this communication to happen via the Spring Cloud Gateway as well. This will help in reducing multiple services going to Consul for getting other service's details.
This means every service should know Gateway's detail at least. And there can be multiple instances of Gateways as well. How is this dealt with in bigger architectures?
Any example that I look up contains one service using Consul, or Gateway using the consul with one microservice. Couldn't understand how to extrapolate that design to a bigger system.