We performed a comparison between A10 Networks Lightning 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."Our clients appreciate that this is a security enabled solution."
"What I like about Lightning ADC, is that instead of having a big appliance sitting in front of the Kubernetes cluster, Lightning can pretty much go inside of Kubernetes."
"It allows you to secure the application while balancing the connections for many other customers, reducing CPU usage and server load."
"The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source."
"It is scalable."
"The support for all major Linux distros makes running and testing a breeze."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are session control which automatically disconnects users that forget to log off, and the ability to write rules to either allow or block certain file requests."
"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."
"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."
"It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable."
"The support from A10 should be improved."
"We would like to see some improvement in the rapidity with which we can customize security facts within the solution."
"A10 documentation is not as open and accessible as AWS and Azure documentation is."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"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."
"The product does not have any new technologies."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"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."
"The solution can be improved by controlling TCP behavior better and mandating to clients what the expected outcome must be in order to avoid receiving contestant timeout logs."
"The visibility could be improved."
A10 Networks Lightning ADC is ranked 16th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 3 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. A10 Networks Lightning ADC is rated 7.0, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Lightning ADC writes "Efficient application security while optimizing connections". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". A10 Networks Lightning ADC is most compared with , whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Envoy. See our A10 Networks Lightning 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.