Comparisons

    How Meecrogate compares with the main solutions on the market

    Technical comparison

    CharacteristicJava solutions (Gravitee)API gateways (Kong / APISIX)Cloud native (AWS / Apigee)Meecrogate
    PhilosophyMonolithic / feature-richPerformance / DevOpsCaptive ecosystem (lock-in)Lean / modular
    Footprint & resourcesHeavy (third-party dependencies)Light (Lua-Nginx / Go)Managed by the cloud providerLight (Java-based)
    Deployment modelVM / K8sVM / K8s / DockerCloud onlyVM, K8s & cloud-agnostic
    Configuration approachDense management UIYAML / CLI / Lua scriptsCloud console / TerraformVisual low-code
    AuditabilityBinary / databaseComplex YAMLProprietaryHuman-readable, auditable JSON
    GitOps readyDifficult (stateful)Yes (declarative)Partial (through heavy IaC)Native (versionable JSON)
    IndependenceSovereign but heavyAgnosticTotal cloud lock-in100% cloud-agnostic

    Sovereignty & compliance

    CharacteristicJava solutions (Gravitee)API gateways (Kong)US cloud (AWS / Apigee)Meecrogate
    Cloud sovereignty Very high (self-hosted) Moderate (US vendor) None (Cloud Act) Maximal (agnostic)
    Data privacy (GDPR) Fully local US control plane Metadata held in the US Fully local / on-premise
    Configuration auditability Database (blob) YAML (verbose) Cloud interface Human-readable JSON
    Longevity (lock-in) Tied to the JVM stack Tied to plugins Complete lock-in Fully reversible