We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Radware Alteon 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."Advanced traffic rules, including stick tables and ACLs, which allow me to shape traffic while it's load balanced."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"The ease of use of the configuration, and great documentation, are the most valuable features for us."
"It reduced the load on our main load balancers."
"It is scalable."
"The support for all major Linux distros makes running and testing a breeze."
"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 strength of this solution is the application delivery controller."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"I like the concept of self-service, that I can do everything on my own."
"I am finding SSL-TLS acceleration the most valuable function, with certificate management. It is easy to generate certificates and assign them to services"
"The most valuable aspect is the ability to customize the types of load-balancing scenarios needed for customized applications. Some of the load balancers on the market today are strictly out-of-hand load balancers for SSL or HTTP. Radware Alteon is most useful for customizing in-house applications based on ports and protocols."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability. During the time that I have been using it, it has not undergone a service failure... And with the integrated application protection, we have not suffered from attacks anymore."
"The interface is easy, it's friendly, and has good alerting."
"The product offers high availability."
"There is no standardized document available. So, any individual has to work from scratch to work it out. If some standard deployment details are available, it would be helpful for people while deploying it. There should be more documentation on the standard deployment."
"We would like to see dynamic ACL and port update support. Our infrastructure relies on randomly allocated ports and this feature would allow us to update without restarting the process."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
"The only area that I can see needing improvement is the management interface, since it is pretty much all through the CLI or configuration. A GUI/web interface could be helpful for users who are not as experienced in the Linux shell. However, HAProxy does have another product that we evaluated called ALOHA, which has a web front-end, but we found it did not meet our needs."
"Documentation could be improved."
"It needs proper HTTP/2 support."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
"The basic clustering is not usable in our very specific setup. The clustering is mainly a configuration replication and is great in a case of active-passive usage. In the case of an active-active (or with more than two nodes) where the configuration is not fully identical, it cannot be used as-is."
"It can be improved by combining the web application firewall (WAF) facility."
"Radware Alteon could improve the troubleshooting from the command line interface, they could do a better job making it easier."
"The solution could be more robust."
"The interface implementation can be improved."
"We are in the process of updating our version of the solution, so judging what should be improved is difficult. But in some cases, the visualization takes a while, especially for mapping issues."
"Scalability should be based on customer requirements."
"I would like for the load balancing to work with premier and the cloud, a mix of premium and cloud."
"Performance could be improved."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and NGINX Plus. See our HAProxy vs. Radware Alteon 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.
