Kong vs Postman: What are the differences?

Introduction

Kong and Postman are popular tools used by developers and API testers for different purposes. This Markdown code will provide a comparison between Kong and Postman, highlighting their key differences.

1. Integration: Kong is an API gateway that integrates and manages multiple APIs, acting as a central point of control. It handles various tasks, such as authentication, rate limiting, and request/response transformations. On the other hand, Postman is primarily an API development and testing tool used for quick testing and documentation of APIs. It provides a user-friendly interface to send requests, view responses, and generate API documentation.

2. Automation and Scripting: Kong offers the ability to automate and customize workflows using plugins and their plugin development kit (PDK). Advanced scripting using Lua is also supported for more intricate customization of API behavior. Postman, on the other hand, provides a powerful scripting environment using JavaScript. The scripting capabilities in Postman enable users to automate API testing, generate dynamic data, and perform complex validations.

3. Collaboration and Team Work: Kong provides features for collaboration and team management, allowing multiple developers to work on API projects simultaneously. It offers role-based access control, versioning, and documentation features to support team collaboration. Postman also provides collaboration features with the ability to share collections, collaborate on requests, and manage team workspaces. It allows teams to work together on API testing and development projects.

4. API Monitoring and Analytics: Kong provides built-in monitoring and analytics capabilities that allow developers to track, analyze, and gain insights into their APIs' performance and usage. It offers real-time metrics, logging, and alerting features to monitor API health and performance. Postman, on the other hand, does not provide native monitoring and analytics features.

5. Deployment and Scaling: Kong is designed for high availability and scalability, with support for multi-datacenter deployments and clustering. It allows developers to easily scale their APIs by adding more instances of Kong. Postman, on the other hand, is primarily a development and testing tool and does not provide built-in features for deployment and scaling. It is commonly used in conjunction with other tools for deployment and hosting of APIs.

6. API Configuration and Orchestration: Kong provides a declarative approach to API configuration using YAML or JSON files, making it easy to define and manage APIs. It also offers a rich set of plugins for configuring and orchestrating API behavior. Postman, on the other hand, does not have a declarative configuration approach. API configuration in Postman is done within the tool itself, making it suitable for quick testing and ad-hoc API development.

In summary, Kong is an API gateway focused on API management, integration, and scalability, while Postman is primarily an API development and testing tool with collaboration features. Kong provides more extensive features for automation, analytics, and deployment, while Postman excels in quick API testing and collaboration within development teams.