Optimizing API Gateway Strategies: Navigating Action-Based Pricing and Architectural Best Practices
In the rapidly evolving landscape of API management, choosing the right gateway solution is crucial—especially when pricing models may influence design decisions. I’ve been exploring various API gateway providers and encountered an intriguing concern: some vendors charge based on the number of “actions” or “endpoints” your API exposes. This raises important questions about how to architect your API for both efficiency and cost-effectiveness.
Understanding the Dilemma
In our current infrastructure, we organize our backend around controllers—think of WidgetsController—with each typical operation having its own dedicated action: CreateWidget, GetWidgets, UpdateWidget, DeleteWidget. For specialized use cases, we sometimes define additional, narrowly scoped actions like GetWidgetsForUseCase1 and GetWidgetsForUseCase2. These specialized actions serve to clearly separate different business logic paths at the controller layer, although the core logic remains shared at the service level.
The Vendor’s Perspective
The API gateway vendor we’re evaluating suggests consolidating multiple actions into fewer endpoints by incorporating parameters or flags to guide behavior. Their tooling can then manage this complexity at the gateway level. While this approach may seem efficient at first glance, it raises concerns about potential vendor lock-in and whether it actually benefits our architectural clarity or performance.
Balancing Concerns
One perplexing aspect is the potential for future growth: discussions are underway about adding new actions that deliver substantially different responses based on request parameters. This leads us to question whether it’s best practice to pack multiple behaviors into a single endpoint or to maintain granular, purpose-specific endpoints—despite the increased number.
Key Considerations
-
Does consolidating multiple narrowly scoped actions into a single, more flexible endpoint offer tangible benefits in terms of performance or maintainability?
-
Or does maintaining separate, focused endpoints promote clearer, more maintainable code—and potentially better API consumer experience—even if it results in more endpoints?
-
How do pricing models that charge per “action” influence long-term API design decisions?
Seeking Insights
If you’ve navigated similar crossroads—particularly when dealing with cost models that count every endpoint or action—you know how complex this decision can become. I’d appreciate hearing your experiences and best practices. Have you found effective ways to balance API clarity, performance, and cost? What strategies have you employed to manage a large-scale API with many specific actions, especially when pricing incentives favor fewer endpoints?
**
