We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Loadbalancer.org based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"It has allowed us to evenly distribute the load across a number of servers, and check their health and automatically react to errors."
"The solution is user-friendly and efficient."
"We did not need technical support because the documentation is good."
"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."
"Software defined load balancing allows us to dynamically adjust and codify routing decisions. This speeds up development."
"I estimate that this product has saved our company hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars in possible downtime from previous load balancers. We make a lot of our money from online sales, so it is critical to have 99.9% uptime."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"For now, it's stable."
"The web stats UI, which provides the status of the health and numbers, could greatly benefit from having a RESTful interface to control the load-balanced nodes. Although there is a hack around the UI (by issuing a POST request to HAProxy with parameters), a RESTful interface would greatly improve the automation process (through Chef and Ansible)."
"The configuration should be more friendly, perhaps with a Web interface. For example, I work with the ClusterControl product for Severalnines, and we have a Web interface to deploy the HAProxy load-balancer."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"Documentation could be improved."
"It needs proper HTTP/2 support."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"You can run into an issue when one engineer passes the case over to another engineer after their shift and they don't know what the first engineer worked on up to that point."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews while Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Fortinet FortiADC, whereas Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Kemp LoadMaster and NGINX Plus. See our HAProxy vs. Loadbalancer.org report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.