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."Security and monitoring for high-performance applications are some of the top features."
"It is a very scalable solution in which you can add more servers instantly."
"The tool integrates well with Amazon native services. Its valuable feature is integrations."
"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."
"It is straightforward to deploy."
"Amazon Elastic Load Balancing transfers the data securely from servers to users and splits the traffic based on peak times."
"It has very good features. It is very configurable. Security with TLS, et cetera is also very easy."
"The solution is very well integrated into Amazon's services."
"The support for all major Linux distros makes running and testing a breeze."
"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."
"I can simplify configurations of many internal services (e.g. Web server configs) by moving some elements (like SSL) to HAProxy. I can also disable additional applications, like Varnish, by moving traffic shaping configurations to HAProxy."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Scalable and inexpensive."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"I have found HAProxy very helpful in replicating production environment architecture in a development and testing environment."
"It is scalable."
"The machines created by Amazon Elastic Load Balancing have different IP addresses, which we are not able to whitelist or predict."
"The solution needs to guarantee stability because multiple loads behind a load balancer can cause service unavailability."
"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."
"The product's stability is an area with a slight shortcoming, which can be improved."
"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 product should be made as an alternative to Amazon services. It would be easier for us if you got one service that is available everywhere."
"They should improve the solution's pricing."
"The product does not have any new technologies."
"The GUI should be more responsive and show the detailed output of logs."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"Improving the documentation with multiple examples and scenarios would be beneficial. Most users encounter similar situations, so having a variety of scenarios readily available on the tool's website would be helpful. For instance, if I were part of the HAProxy team, I'd create a webpage with different scenarios and provide files for each scenario. This way, users wouldn't have to start from scratch every time."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration."
More Amazon Elastic Load Balancing Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is ranked 11th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 10 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.