Akka HTTP vs Ktor

Overview

Akka HTTP

Stacks54

Followers49

Votes0

Ktor

Stacks173

Followers339

Votes27

GitHub Stars14.1K

Forks1.2K

Akka HTTP vs Ktor: What are the differences?

## Introduction

Key Differences between Akka HTTP and Ktor:

1. **Architecture**: Akka HTTP is built on top of the Akka actor model, providing a highly parallel and scalable architecture for handling requests and responses. On the other hand, Ktor uses coroutines, a lightweight concurrency design pattern in Kotlin, to handle asynchronous operations efficiently.
   
2. **Routing**: Akka HTTP uses a DSL for defining routes, which can be complex for beginners, but offers a lot of flexibility for advanced users. In contrast, Ktor provides a more concise and intuitive routing API, making it easier to define routes and handlers quickly.

3. **Client Support**: Akka HTTP has robust built-in support for both synchronous and asynchronous HTTP clients, making it suitable for building microservices and web applications that need to make HTTP requests to other services. Ktor, on the other hand, focuses more on server-side development and lacks the comprehensive client capabilities of Akka HTTP.

4. **Streaming**: Akka HTTP has excellent support for streaming data, allowing for efficient processing of large payloads in a reactive manner. Ktor also supports streaming, but it is not as feature-rich or optimized for high-performance as Akka HTTP.

5. **Community and Ecosystem**: Akka HTTP has a larger community and more mature ecosystem compared to Ktor, which may result in better support, more third-party libraries, and a greater pool of experienced developers available for help and collaboration.

In Summary, Akka HTTP and Ktor differ in architecture, routing, client support, streaming capabilities, and community ecosystem.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Akka HTTP	Ktor
The Akka HTTP modules implement a full server- and client-side HTTP stack on top of akka-actor and akka-stream. It’s not a web-framework but rather a more general toolkit for providing and consuming HTTP-based services. While interaction with a browser is of course also in scope it is not the primary focus of Akka HTTP.	It is a framework for building asynchronous servers and clients in connected systems using the Kotlin programming language.
Full server- and client-side HTTP stack; Toolkit for providing and consuming HTTP-based services	Unopinionated;Asynchronous;Testable
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 14.1K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 1.2K
Stacks 54	Stacks 173
Followers 49	Followers 339
Votes 0	Votes 27
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 9 Simple & Small 8 Kotlin native 7 Light weight 3 High performance Cons 2 Not self-explanatory: relies on Kotlin "magic" 2 Relatively fresh technology - not a lot of expertise
Integrations
Java Scala	Linux Windows IntelliJ IDEA Kotlin macOS

What are some alternatives to Akka HTTP, Ktor?

ExpressJS

Express is a minimal and flexible node.js web application framework, providing a robust set of features for building single and multi-page, and hybrid web applications.

Django REST framework

It is a powerful and flexible toolkit that makes it easy to build Web APIs.

Sails.js

Sails is designed to mimic the MVC pattern of frameworks like Ruby on Rails, but with support for the requirements of modern apps: data-driven APIs with scalable, service-oriented architecture.

Sinatra

Sinatra is a DSL for quickly creating web applications in Ruby with minimal effort.

Lumen

Laravel Lumen is a stunningly fast PHP micro-framework for building web applications with expressive, elegant syntax. We believe development must be an enjoyable, creative experience to be truly fulfilling. Lumen attempts to take the pain out of development by easing common tasks used in the majority of web projects, such as routing, database abstraction, queueing, and caching.

Slim

Slim is easy to use for both beginners and professionals. Slim favors cleanliness over terseness and common cases over edge cases. Its interface is simple, intuitive, and extensively documented — both online and in the code itself.

Fastify

Fastify is a web framework highly focused on speed and low overhead. It is inspired from Hapi and Express and as far as we know, it is one of the fastest web frameworks in town. Use Fastify can increase your throughput up to 100%.

Falcon

Falcon is a minimalist WSGI library for building speedy web APIs and app backends. We like to think of Falcon as the Dieter Rams of web frameworks.

hapi

hapi is a simple to use configuration-centric framework with built-in support for input validation, caching, authentication, and other essential facilities for building web applications and services.

TypeORM

It supports both Active Record and Data Mapper patterns, unlike all other JavaScript ORMs currently in existence, which means you can write high quality, loosely coupled, scalable, maintainable applications the most productive way.

Related Comparisons

Akka HTTP vs Ktor: What are the differences?

## Introduction

Key Differences between Akka HTTP and Ktor:

1. **Architecture**: Akka HTTP is built on top of the Akka actor model, providing a highly parallel and scalable architecture for handling requests and responses. On the other hand, Ktor uses coroutines, a lightweight concurrency design pattern in Kotlin, to handle asynchronous operations efficiently.
   
2. **Routing**: Akka HTTP uses a DSL for defining routes, which can be complex for beginners, but offers a lot of flexibility for advanced users. In contrast, Ktor provides a more concise and intuitive routing API, making it easier to define routes and handlers quickly.

3. **Client Support**: Akka HTTP has robust built-in support for both synchronous and asynchronous HTTP clients, making it suitable for building microservices and web applications that need to make HTTP requests to other services. Ktor, on the other hand, focuses more on server-side development and lacks the comprehensive client capabilities of Akka HTTP.

4. **Streaming**: Akka HTTP has excellent support for streaming data, allowing for efficient processing of large payloads in a reactive manner. Ktor also supports streaming, but it is not as feature-rich or optimized for high-performance as Akka HTTP.

5. **Community and Ecosystem**: Akka HTTP has a larger community and more mature ecosystem compared to Ktor, which may result in better support, more third-party libraries, and a greater pool of experienced developers available for help and collaboration.

In Summary, Akka HTTP and Ktor differ in architecture, routing, client support, streaming capabilities, and community ecosystem.

Akka HTTP vs Ktor

Overview