Kong vs seneca

Overview

Kong

Stacks671

Followers1.5K

Votes139

GitHub Stars42.1K

Forks5.0K

seneca

Stacks29

Followers42

Votes2

GitHub Stars4

Forks1

Kong vs seneca: What are the differences?

Introduction: Kong and Seneca are two popular tools used in the development of microservices architecture. Understanding the key differences between Kong and Seneca can help developers make informed decisions on which tool best suits their project requirements.

Protocol Support: Kong is an API Gateway that supports various protocols like HTTP, TCP, and WebSockets, making it suitable for a wide range of use cases. On the other hand, Seneca is a microservices toolkit that primarily focuses on inter-service communication within a single system, making it ideal for internal communication between microservices.
Plugin Ecosystem: Kong has a robust plugin ecosystem that allows users to extend functionalities such as authentication, logging, and rate limiting easily. Seneca, on the other hand, lacks a built-in plugin system, requiring developers to write custom code for implementing additional features.
API Management Features: Kong provides features for API management, such as API rate limiting, analytics, and authentication out of the box, making it a comprehensive solution for managing APIs. Seneca, on the other hand, does not have native API management capabilities and requires additional integration with tools like Kong or Apigee for these features.
Scalability: Kong is built for high performance and scalability, making it suitable for managing large volumes of API requests and traffic. Seneca, being a toolkit for microservices, may require additional configurations and optimizations for scaling to handle high loads efficiently.
Ease of Use: Kong offers a user-friendly interface and easy configuration options, making it straightforward for developers to set up and manage APIs. Seneca, being more focused on microservices development, requires a deeper understanding of its programming model and may have a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Community Support: Kong has a larger and more active community, with extensive documentation, tutorials, and community-contributed plugins available for users. Seneca, while having a dedicated user base, may have limited resources and community support compared to Kong.

In Summary, understanding the key differences between Kong and Seneca, such as protocol support, plugin ecosystem, API management features, scalability, ease of use, and community support, can help developers make informed decisions when choosing a tool for their microservices architecture.

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

Advice on Kong, seneca

Prateek

Mar 14, 2020

Decided

Istio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn-keyIstio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn key solution with Rancher whereas Kong completely lacks here. Traffic distribution in Istio can be done via canary, a/b, shadowing, HTTP headers, ACL, whitelist whereas in Kong it's limited to canary, ACL, blue-green, proxy caching. Istio has amazing community support which is visible via Github stars or releases when comparing both.

322k views322k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kong	seneca
Kong is a scalable, open source API Layer (also known as an API Gateway, or API Middleware). Kong controls layer 4 and 7 traffic and is extended through Plugins, which provide extra functionality and services beyond the core platform.	Seneca is a toolkit for organizing the business logic of your app. You can break down your app into "stuff that happens", rather than focusing on data models or managing dependencies.
Logging: Log requests and responses to your system over TCP, UDP or to disk; OAuth2.0: Add easily an OAuth2.0 authentication to your APIs; Monitoring: Live monitoring provides key load and performance server metrics; IP-restriction: Whitelist or blacklist IPs that can make requests; Authentication: Manage consumer credentials query string and header tokens; Rate-limiting: Block and throttle requests based on IP or authentication; Transformations: Add, remove or manipulate HTTP params and headers on-the-fly; CORS: Enable cross-origin requests to your APIs that would otherwise be blocked; Anything: Need custom functionality? Extend Kong with your own Lua plugins;	pattern matching: a wonderfully flexible way to handle business requirements;transport independence: how messages get to the right server is not something you should have to worry about;maturity: 5 years in production (before we called it micro-services), but was once taken out by lightning;deep and wide ecosystem of plugins
Statistics
GitHub Stars 42.1K	GitHub Stars 4
GitHub Forks 5.0K	GitHub Forks 1
Stacks 671	Stacks 29
Followers 1.5K	Followers 42
Votes 139	Votes 2
Pros & Cons
Pros 37 Easy to maintain 32 Easy to install 26 Flexible 21 Great performance 7 Api blueprint	Pros 2 Multi transports support
Integrations
Cassandra Docker Prometheus Kubernetes PostgreSQL NGINX Vagrant	Node.js

What are some alternatives to Kong, seneca?

Istio

Istio is an open platform for providing a uniform way to integrate microservices, manage traffic flow across microservices, enforce policies and aggregate telemetry data. Istio's control plane provides an abstraction layer over the underlying cluster management platform, such as Kubernetes, Mesos, etc.

Amazon API Gateway

Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management.

Tyk Cloud

Tyk is a leading Open Source API Gateway and Management Platform, featuring an API gateway, analytics, developer portal and dashboard. We power billions of transactions for thousands of innovative organisations.

Azure Service Fabric

Azure Service Fabric is a distributed systems platform that makes it easy to package, deploy, and manage scalable and reliable microservices. Service Fabric addresses the significant challenges in developing and managing cloud apps.

Moleculer

It is a fault tolerant framework. It has built-in load balancer, circuit breaker, retries, timeout and bulkhead features. It is open source and free of charge project.

Express Gateway

A cloud-native microservices gateway completely configurable and extensible through JavaScript/Node.js built for ALL platforms and languages. Enterprise features are FREE thanks to the power of 3K+ ExpressJS battle hardened modules.

ArangoDB Foxx

It is a JavaScript framework for writing data-centric HTTP microservices that run directly inside of ArangoDB.

Dapr

It is a portable, event-driven runtime that makes it easy for developers to build resilient, stateless and stateful microservices that run on the cloud and edge and embraces the diversity of languages and developer frameworks.

Zuul

It is the front door for all requests from devices and websites to the backend of the Netflix streaming application. As an edge service application, It is built to enable dynamic routing, monitoring, resiliency, and security. Routing is an integral part of a microservice architecture.

linkerd

linkerd is an out-of-process network stack for microservices. It functions as a transparent RPC proxy, handling everything needed to make inter-service RPC safe and sane--including load-balancing, service discovery, instrumentation, and routing.

Related Comparisons

Kong vs seneca: What are the differences?

Protocol Support: Kong is an API Gateway that supports various protocols like HTTP, TCP, and WebSockets, making it suitable for a wide range of use cases. On the other hand, Seneca is a microservices toolkit that primarily focuses on inter-service communication within a single system, making it ideal for internal communication between microservices.
Plugin Ecosystem: Kong has a robust plugin ecosystem that allows users to extend functionalities such as authentication, logging, and rate limiting easily. Seneca, on the other hand, lacks a built-in plugin system, requiring developers to write custom code for implementing additional features.
API Management Features: Kong provides features for API management, such as API rate limiting, analytics, and authentication out of the box, making it a comprehensive solution for managing APIs. Seneca, on the other hand, does not have native API management capabilities and requires additional integration with tools like Kong or Apigee for these features.
Scalability: Kong is built for high performance and scalability, making it suitable for managing large volumes of API requests and traffic. Seneca, being a toolkit for microservices, may require additional configurations and optimizations for scaling to handle high loads efficiently.
Ease of Use: Kong offers a user-friendly interface and easy configuration options, making it straightforward for developers to set up and manage APIs. Seneca, being more focused on microservices development, requires a deeper understanding of its programming model and may have a steeper learning curve for beginners.
Community Support: Kong has a larger and more active community, with extensive documentation, tutorials, and community-contributed plugins available for users. Seneca, while having a dedicated user base, may have limited resources and community support compared to Kong.

Kong vs seneca

Overview