We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Radware LinkProof 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."It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"We did not need technical support because the documentation is good."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"I have found HAProxy very helpful in replicating production environment architecture in a development and testing environment."
"I am also able to make configuration changes during the day, in production, with no worries of problems and/or downtime occurring."
"The anti-DDOS PacketShield filtering solution (embedded in the physical appliances) as well as the BGP route injection are great features and heavily used."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"There are three main areas to improve: 1) Make remote management more modern by adding API. 2) Propose a general HA solution for HAProxy (no I'm using keepalived for this). 3) Thread option should be a bit more stable."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic."
"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."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"Documentation could be improved."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews while Radware LinkProof is ranked 13th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Radware LinkProof 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 Radware LinkProof writes "Supports link load balance and has good stability". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Envoy, whereas Radware LinkProof is most compared with Radware Alteon, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and Fortinet FortiADC. See our HAProxy vs. Radware LinkProof 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.