We performed a comparison between HAProxy and HashiCorp Consul based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Service Mesh solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I am also able to make configuration changes during the day, in production, with no worries of problems and/or downtime occurring."
"The most valuable thing for me is TCP/IP Layer 4 stuff you can do with HAProxy. You can go down to the protocol level and make decisions on something."
"I can simplify configurations of many internal services (e.g. Web server configs) by moving some elements (like SSL) to HAProxy. I can also disable additional applications, like Varnish, by moving traffic shaping configurations to HAProxy."
"It reduced the load on our main load balancers."
"The solution is effective in managing our traffic."
"Advanced traffic rules, including stick tables and ACLs, which allow me to shape traffic while it's load balanced."
"Software defined load balancing allows us to dynamically adjust and codify routing decisions. This speeds up development."
"The VRRP redundancy is also a mission-critical feature that works seamlessly. I can bring down a server live with minimal downtime because of this."
"The documentation is good."
"The product's most valuable features are support for Service Mesh TLS and canary deployment."
"HashiCorp Consul's most valuable feature is the automation of many processes, which limits the errors from user interaction."
"Sometimes it's challenging to get through the log, and you need a log to understand what is going on. It isn't easy to map the logging with the documentation, and every time I read the log, I have to pull out the documentation to understand what I'm reading."
"If nbproc = 2, you will have two processes of HAProxy running. However, the stats of HAProxy will not be aggregated, meaning you don't really know the collective status in a single point of view."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
"I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available."
"While troubleshooting, we are having some difficulties. There are no issues when it is running; it is stable and very good; however, if there is a troubleshooting issue or an incident occurs, we will have issues because this is open-source."
"We would like to see dynamic ACL and port update support. Our infrastructure relies on randomly allocated ports and this feature would allow us to update without restarting the process."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"They could improve issues related to triggering generic deployments for the platform."
"Health check outputs are delayed sometimes."
"The command line of HashiCorp Consul could be more intuitive to make it easier to use."
HAProxy is ranked 2nd in Service Mesh with 41 reviews while HashiCorp Consul is ranked 6th in Service Mesh with 3 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while HashiCorp Consul is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HashiCorp Consul writes "A scalable solution that can be used to perform health checks of applications and services". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Envoy, whereas HashiCorp Consul is most compared with NGINX Service-Mesh, Kong Mesh, AWS App Mesh, VMware Tanzu Service Mesh and Envoy. See our HAProxy vs. HashiCorp Consul report.
See our list of best Service Mesh vendors.
We monitor all Service Mesh reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
