How does Lura compare to KrakenD?

Lura is the underlying Go framework for building custom API gateways, while KrakenD is a complete, ready-to-run API Gateway built on Lura. Use Lura for development flexibility; choose KrakenD for a pre-packaged solution with more features out of the box.

Can Lura handle WebSocket connections?

Lura primarily focuses on HTTP(S) and can be adapted for other protocols, but WebSocket support isn't built-in. You would need to implement custom middleware or extensions to handle WebSocket connections.

How to add authentication like OAuth to Lura?

Authentication can be added via middleware plugins. Lura supports extensible middlewares, so you integrate OAuth plugins by configuring them in your JSON setup or through custom code, as referenced in the middleware support section.

Is Lura suitable for GraphQL APIs?

Lura is designed for RESTful aggregation and optimization, not natively for GraphQL. While you could adapt it with custom middleware, GraphQL-specific gateways like Apollo might be more appropriate for such use cases.

What are the performance benchmarks for Lura?

Lura emphasizes high performance, with benchmark results detailed in the documentation. It shows low latency and high throughput in aggregation scenarios, making it competitive for microservices architectures.

How to deploy Lura in Kubernetes?

Since Lura is a Go application, you compile it into a binary and containerize it using Docker. Deployment involves creating a Kubernetes deployment YAML with the compiled image, similar to other Go services, though specific examples are not provided in the README.

Open-Awesome

Lura

NOASSERTIONGov2.13.0Self-Hosted

An open-source Go framework for building ultra-performant API gateways with middleware support.

Visit Website GitHub

6.8k stars585 forks0 contributors

What is Lura?

Lura is an open-source API Gateway framework written in Go that enables developers to build high-performance proxies and gateways. It aggregates multiple backend API calls into single endpoints, reducing client complexity and improving performance by returning only the necessary data.

Target Audience

Backend engineers and platform teams building microservices architectures who need to orchestrate, aggregate, and optimize API responses for web and mobile clients.

Value Proposition

Developers choose Lura for its extreme performance, modular middleware architecture, and flexibility in building custom API gateways without vendor lock-in, leveraging a proven framework used in the KrakenD API Gateway.

Overview

Ultra performant API Gateway with middlewares. A project hosted at The Linux Foundation

Use Cases

Best For

Aggregating multiple microservice APIs into single endpoints for mobile apps
Reducing payload size and network round trips in microservices architectures
Building custom API gateways with specific middleware requirements
Creating high-performance proxies for legacy API modernization
Implementing response transformation and field filtering for client optimization
Developing RPC gateways alongside HTTP(S) APIs

Not Ideal For

Teams seeking a fully managed SaaS API gateway with zero infrastructure setup
Projects requiring out-of-the-box graphical dashboards, analytics, or API monetization features
Simple proxy use cases where a web server like Nginx with basic configuration suffices

Pros & Cons

Pros

High-Performance Aggregation

Aggregates multiple backend calls into single endpoints, reducing network round trips and payload size, which is core to its optimization for mobile and web clients as shown in the practical example.

Modular Unix Philosophy

Built from small, reusable components, allowing developers to assemble custom gateways without bloat, emphasizing composability as stated in the philosophy.

Extensible Middleware Support

Supports plugins for OAuth, security, logging, and more, enabling easy integration of custom functionality without modifying the core framework.

Protocol Flexibility

Can be adapted beyond HTTP(S) for RPC and other protocols, offering versatility in gateway implementations, as highlighted in the protocol flexibility feature.

Cons

Complex Configuration

Requires detailed JSON configuration files to define endpoints and backends, which can be error-prone and less intuitive than GUI-based tools, adding setup overhead.

Limited Built-in Features

As a framework, it lacks many pre-built management features like caching, rate limiting, or dashboards, necessitating additional development or integration efforts.

Go-Centric Dependency

Being a Go library, it demands Go expertise and toolchain, which may not align with teams using other programming languages or preferring polyglot environments.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Projects

Gin

Gin is a high-performance HTTP web framework written in Go. It provides a Martini-like API but with significantly better performance—up to 40 times faster—thanks to httprouter. Gin is designed for building REST APIs, web applications, and microservices.

Stars88,946

Forks8,649

Last commit7 days ago

Go-zero

A cloud-native Go microservices framework with cli tool for productivity.

Stars33,213

Forks4,312

Last commit14 hours ago

go-kit

A standard library for microservices.

Stars27,431

Forks2,444

Last commit2 years ago

Kratos

Your ultimate Go microservices framework for the cloud-native era.

Stars25,803

Forks4,168

Last commit22 days ago

Community-curated · Updated weekly · 100% open source

Found a gem we're missing?

Open-Awesome is built by the community, for the community. Submit a project, suggest an awesome list, or help improve the catalog on GitHub.

Submit a project Star on GitHub