We performed a comparison between Barracuda Load Balancer ADC and HAProxy 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."The price is very good, and it's not very expensive."
"Barracuda's technical support is good - whenever we have an issue, they immediately connect and resolve it."
"The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services."
"The ease of use of the configuration, and great documentation, are the most valuable features for us."
"The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source."
"I am also able to make configuration changes during the day, in production, with no worries of problems and/or downtime occurring."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"HAProxy Enterprise Edition has been rock solid. We have essentially had no downtime caused by our load balancers in the last 10 months, because they’ve worked so well. Previously, our load balancers caused us multiple hours per year in downtime."
"What I like best about the product is its simplicity and speed. When you need to set up a load balancer quickly, HAProxy offers options like sticky sessions and round-robin. It's also fast to configure, including adding SSL for security. While it may have fewer options than other solutions like F5, HAProxy gets the job done for basic load-balancing tasks."
"The quality of the solution's performance could be improved."
"Load Balancer ADC is competitively priced, but it's not feature-rich, and its technology is not that advanced."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"It needs proper HTTP/2 support."
"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."
"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."
"The visibility could be improved."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"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)."
"HAProxy could do with some good combination integrations."
Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is ranked 14th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 3 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is rated 7.4, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Barracuda Load Balancer ADC writes "Cost-effective but lacking features and integration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiADC, Citrix NetScaler and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Envoy. See our Barracuda Load Balancer ADC vs. HAProxy 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.
