How to introduce versioning for endpoints for akka http
I have 5 controllers in akka-http. Each endpoint has 5 endpoints(routes). Now I need to introduce versioning for those. All endpoints should be prefixed with /version1.
For example if there was an endpoint xyz now it should be /version1/xyz.
One of the ways is to add a pathPrefix But it needs to be added to each controller.
Is there way to add it at a common place so that it appears for all endpoints.
I am using akka-http with scala.
scala refactoring versioning endpoint akka-http
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
add a comment |
I have 5 controllers in akka-http. Each endpoint has 5 endpoints(routes). Now I need to introduce versioning for those. All endpoints should be prefixed with /version1.
For example if there was an endpoint xyz now it should be /version1/xyz.
One of the ways is to add a pathPrefix But it needs to be added to each controller.
Is there way to add it at a common place so that it appears for all endpoints.
I am using akka-http with scala.
scala refactoring versioning endpoint akka-http
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
add a comment |
I have 5 controllers in akka-http. Each endpoint has 5 endpoints(routes). Now I need to introduce versioning for those. All endpoints should be prefixed with /version1.
For example if there was an endpoint xyz now it should be /version1/xyz.
One of the ways is to add a pathPrefix But it needs to be added to each controller.
Is there way to add it at a common place so that it appears for all endpoints.
I am using akka-http with scala.
scala refactoring versioning endpoint akka-http
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
I have 5 controllers in akka-http. Each endpoint has 5 endpoints(routes). Now I need to introduce versioning for those. All endpoints should be prefixed with /version1.
For example if there was an endpoint xyz now it should be /version1/xyz.
One of the ways is to add a pathPrefix But it needs to be added to each controller.
Is there way to add it at a common place so that it appears for all endpoints.
I am using akka-http with scala.
scala refactoring versioning endpoint akka-http
scala refactoring versioning endpoint akka-http
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
asked Nov 21 at 9:55
user9920500
535
535
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
You can create a base route, that accepts paths like /version1/... and refers to internal routes without path prefix.
val version1Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val version2Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val route = pathPrefix("version1") {
version1Route
} ~ pathPrefix("version2") {
version2Route
}
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
add a comment |
Indirect Answer
Aleksey Isachenkov's answer is the correct direct solution.
One alternative is to put versioning in the hostname instead of the path. Once you have "version1" of your Route values in source-control then you can tag that checkin as "version1", deploy it into production, and then use DNS entries to set the service name to version1.myservice.com.
Then, once newer functionality becomes necessary you update your code and tag it in source-control as "version2". Release this updated build and use DNS to set the name as version2.myservice.com, while still keeping the version1 instance running. This would result in two active services running independently.
The benefits of this method are:
- Your code does not continuously grow longer as new versions are released.
- You can use logging to figure out if a version hasn't been used in a long time and then just kill that running instance of the service to End-Of-Life the version.
- You can use DNS to define your current "production" version by having
production.myservice.compoint to whichever version of the service you want. For example: once you've releasedversion24.myservice.comand tested it for a while you can update theproduction.myservice.compointer to go to 24 from 23. The old version can stay running for any users that don't want to upgrade, but anybody who wants the latest version can always use "production".
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53409398%2fhow-to-introduce-versioning-for-endpoints-for-akka-http%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You can create a base route, that accepts paths like /version1/... and refers to internal routes without path prefix.
val version1Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val version2Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val route = pathPrefix("version1") {
version1Route
} ~ pathPrefix("version2") {
version2Route
}
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
add a comment |
You can create a base route, that accepts paths like /version1/... and refers to internal routes without path prefix.
val version1Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val version2Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val route = pathPrefix("version1") {
version1Route
} ~ pathPrefix("version2") {
version2Route
}
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
add a comment |
You can create a base route, that accepts paths like /version1/... and refers to internal routes without path prefix.
val version1Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val version2Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val route = pathPrefix("version1") {
version1Route
} ~ pathPrefix("version2") {
version2Route
}
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
You can create a base route, that accepts paths like /version1/... and refers to internal routes without path prefix.
val version1Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val version2Route = path("xyz") {
...
}
val route = pathPrefix("version1") {
version1Route
} ~ pathPrefix("version2") {
version2Route
}
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
answered Nov 21 at 10:55
Aleksey Isachenkov
592113
592113
add a comment |
add a comment |
Indirect Answer
Aleksey Isachenkov's answer is the correct direct solution.
One alternative is to put versioning in the hostname instead of the path. Once you have "version1" of your Route values in source-control then you can tag that checkin as "version1", deploy it into production, and then use DNS entries to set the service name to version1.myservice.com.
Then, once newer functionality becomes necessary you update your code and tag it in source-control as "version2". Release this updated build and use DNS to set the name as version2.myservice.com, while still keeping the version1 instance running. This would result in two active services running independently.
The benefits of this method are:
- Your code does not continuously grow longer as new versions are released.
- You can use logging to figure out if a version hasn't been used in a long time and then just kill that running instance of the service to End-Of-Life the version.
- You can use DNS to define your current "production" version by having
production.myservice.compoint to whichever version of the service you want. For example: once you've releasedversion24.myservice.comand tested it for a while you can update theproduction.myservice.compointer to go to 24 from 23. The old version can stay running for any users that don't want to upgrade, but anybody who wants the latest version can always use "production".
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
add a comment |
Indirect Answer
Aleksey Isachenkov's answer is the correct direct solution.
One alternative is to put versioning in the hostname instead of the path. Once you have "version1" of your Route values in source-control then you can tag that checkin as "version1", deploy it into production, and then use DNS entries to set the service name to version1.myservice.com.
Then, once newer functionality becomes necessary you update your code and tag it in source-control as "version2". Release this updated build and use DNS to set the name as version2.myservice.com, while still keeping the version1 instance running. This would result in two active services running independently.
The benefits of this method are:
- Your code does not continuously grow longer as new versions are released.
- You can use logging to figure out if a version hasn't been used in a long time and then just kill that running instance of the service to End-Of-Life the version.
- You can use DNS to define your current "production" version by having
production.myservice.compoint to whichever version of the service you want. For example: once you've releasedversion24.myservice.comand tested it for a while you can update theproduction.myservice.compointer to go to 24 from 23. The old version can stay running for any users that don't want to upgrade, but anybody who wants the latest version can always use "production".
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
add a comment |
Indirect Answer
Aleksey Isachenkov's answer is the correct direct solution.
One alternative is to put versioning in the hostname instead of the path. Once you have "version1" of your Route values in source-control then you can tag that checkin as "version1", deploy it into production, and then use DNS entries to set the service name to version1.myservice.com.
Then, once newer functionality becomes necessary you update your code and tag it in source-control as "version2". Release this updated build and use DNS to set the name as version2.myservice.com, while still keeping the version1 instance running. This would result in two active services running independently.
The benefits of this method are:
- Your code does not continuously grow longer as new versions are released.
- You can use logging to figure out if a version hasn't been used in a long time and then just kill that running instance of the service to End-Of-Life the version.
- You can use DNS to define your current "production" version by having
production.myservice.compoint to whichever version of the service you want. For example: once you've releasedversion24.myservice.comand tested it for a while you can update theproduction.myservice.compointer to go to 24 from 23. The old version can stay running for any users that don't want to upgrade, but anybody who wants the latest version can always use "production".
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
Indirect Answer
Aleksey Isachenkov's answer is the correct direct solution.
One alternative is to put versioning in the hostname instead of the path. Once you have "version1" of your Route values in source-control then you can tag that checkin as "version1", deploy it into production, and then use DNS entries to set the service name to version1.myservice.com.
Then, once newer functionality becomes necessary you update your code and tag it in source-control as "version2". Release this updated build and use DNS to set the name as version2.myservice.com, while still keeping the version1 instance running. This would result in two active services running independently.
The benefits of this method are:
- Your code does not continuously grow longer as new versions are released.
- You can use logging to figure out if a version hasn't been used in a long time and then just kill that running instance of the service to End-Of-Life the version.
- You can use DNS to define your current "production" version by having
production.myservice.compoint to whichever version of the service you want. For example: once you've releasedversion24.myservice.comand tested it for a while you can update theproduction.myservice.compointer to go to 24 from 23. The old version can stay running for any users that don't want to upgrade, but anybody who wants the latest version can always use "production".
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
edited Nov 21 at 15:24
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
answered Nov 21 at 13:35
Ramon J Romero y Vigil
11.6k24071
11.6k24071
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53409398%2fhow-to-introduce-versioning-for-endpoints-for-akka-http%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
