REST
-
Uses standard HTTP methods like GET, POST, PUT, DELETE for CRUD operations.
-
Works well when you need simple, uniform interfaces between separate services/applications.
-
Caching strategies are straightforward to implement.
-
The downside is it may require multiple roundtrips to assemble related data from separate endpoints.
- 使用标准 HTTP 方法（如 GET、POST、PUT、DELETE ）进行 CRUD 操作。
- 当您需要在单独的服务/应用程序之间使用简单、统一的接口时，效果很好。
- 缓存策略很容易实现。
- 缺点是它可能需要多次往返才能从不同的端点收集相关数据。
GraphQL
Provides a single endpoint for clients to query for precisely the data they need.
为客户提供单个终端节点，以精确查询所需的数据。
Clients specify the exact fields required in nested queries, and the server returns optimized payloads containing just those fields.
客户端指定嵌套查询中所需的确切字段，服务器返回仅包含这些字段的优化负载。
Supports Mutations for modifying data and Subscriptions for real-time notifications.
支持用于修改数据的 Mutations 和用于实时通知的 Subscriptions。
Great for aggregating data from multiple sources and works well with rapidly evolving frontend requirements.
非常适合聚合来自多个来源的数据，并很好地满足快速发展的前端需求。
However, it shifts complexity to the client side and can allow abusive queries if not properly safeguarded
但是，它将复杂性转移到客户端，并且如果没有得到适当的保护，可能会允许滥用查询
Caching strategies can be more complicated than REST.
缓存策略可能比 REST 更复杂。
The best choice between REST and GraphQL depends on the specific requirements of the application and development team. GraphQL is a good fit for complex or frequently changing frontend needs, while REST suits applications where simple and consistent contracts are preferred.
REST 和 GraphQL 之间的最佳选择取决于应用程序和开发团队的具体要求。GraphQL 非常适合复杂或经常变化的前端需求，而 REST 则适合首选简单且一致的合同的应用程序。
Neither API approach is a silver bullet. Carefully evaluating requirements and tradeoffs is important to pick the right style. Both REST and GraphQL are valid options for exposing data and powering modern applications.
这两种 API 方法都不是灵丹妙药。仔细评估要求和权衡对于选择正确的样式很重要。REST 和 GraphQL 都是公开数据和为现代应用程序提供支持的有效选项。
