We performed a comparison between Amazon Elastic Load Balancing 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."It has very good features. It is very configurable. Security with TLS, et cetera is also very easy."
"The solution offers good load balancing."
"It is straightforward to deploy."
"It is a very scalable solution in which you can add more servers instantly."
"Amazon Elastic Load Balancing transfers the data securely from servers to users and splits the traffic based on peak times."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is scaling."
"The feature that I like the most is the scalability. The solutions I build often have many pieces, which are very complicated. If a client comes to me with a design, my developer has made this as a template or a cloud formation script. It's a design on paper, and I want it executed a certain way. I can do that quickly and repeatedly with AWS. That is a considerable advantage because I can take that template and do it five times in different zones. That is an excellent feature based on a template, et cetera."
"The solution is very well integrated into Amazon's services."
"The most important features would be the load-balancing of HTTP and TCP requests, according to multiple LB-algorithms (busyness, weighted-busyness, round robin, traffic, etc). Another important feature that we cannot live without is the username/passwd authentication for legacy systems that had none."
"I am also able to make configuration changes during the day, in production, with no worries of problems and/or downtime occurring."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"We did not need technical support because the documentation is good."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"It reduced the load on our main load balancers."
"We don't have a problem with the user interface. it's good."
"The reporting could be simplified so that the client sees a report of what they cached at the end of the month and the number of hits. It should have metrics above and beyond their Google analytics, etc. You can't do that with the solutions from AWS. You have to build sophisticated cloud trails, reports, dashboards, etc. The setup is significant, and it's hard to manage. You'll need to hire someone or pay a consultant on a regular basis to manage it, and it's not for the faint of heart."
"We faced some issues with the health check."
"The solution needs to guarantee stability because multiple loads behind a load balancer can cause service unavailability."
"The product's stability is an area with a slight shortcoming, which can be improved."
"They should improve the solution's pricing."
"The machines created by Amazon Elastic Load Balancing have different IP addresses, which we are not able to whitelist or predict."
"One issue that we faced with ALB was that leaf-level certificate validation was not happening. It is not that user-friendly in that aspect."
"It would be good if we had a product that integrates well with third-party vendors. Some of our customers want a multi-cloud solution. They don't want to be tied up to or be in just one cloud."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
"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."
"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."
"The reconfigurability in terms of the tooling could be improved and maybe an editor plugin can be added."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"Dynamic update API. More things should be possible to be configured during runtime."
"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."
More Amazon Elastic Load Balancing Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is ranked 11th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 9 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is rated 8.4, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Amazon Elastic Load Balancing writes "A tool that offers its users resiliency, high availability, and a great scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and NGINX Plus, whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Radware Alteon. See our Amazon Elastic Load Balancing 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.