We performed a comparison between Barracuda Load Balancer ADC, Citrix NetScaler, and HAProxy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."Barracuda's technical support is good - whenever we have an issue, they immediately connect and resolve it."
"The price is very good, and it's not very expensive."
"The solution is very stable."
"Provides resiliency for applications that reside on servers, as well as connectivity to remote applications."
"The solution was very easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix ADC is its ease of use."
"Citrix NetScaler offers robust security features, including SmartAccess and customizable policies, making it a reliable choice for safeguarding user data."
"Load Balancing and SSL offloading are key features."
"Easy, user-friendly setup with content switching and integrated caching features."
"The best feature of Citrix is its track record of stability in its features."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"I have found HAProxy very helpful in replicating production environment architecture in a development and testing environment."
"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 feature that I have found the most valuable is that it works for my use case of application load balancing. I'm using it for PeerSense, and it's easy enough for PeerSense."
"HAProxy potentially has a good return on investment"
"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."
"Citrix ADC can improve if it provides a more user-friendly interface and clear working protocols. Citrix is not working with classic RFC, it is working with Citrix RFC, which is not common in the world. If engineers of Citrix can provide us with more information on working with the classic IP networks it would be a benefit."
"ADC from Citrix has added functionalities from other products and the usability is very difficult for someone who is used to a simpler user interface, it's a little bit of a mess to use."
"We have issues with the certificates. All authorization processes need certificates, however, every three months we needed to change certificates. This process iss complicated for us because Citrix does not have a not user-friendly interface and does not off user-friendly services. This needs a lot of improvement."
"The setup for Citrix NetScaler has room for improvement. It could be easier."
"They can improve the scalability and the multi-tenancy feature. We recently tried to configure an authentication, and we ran into some issues while using the web-based GUI. It was very slow when you log in with your credentials in the web-based GUI. Each time we clicked on the menu, it tried to do the authentication. It works properly in the console."
"An area for improvement would be the difficulty in finding information about standard licensing costs over the internet. They should provide some reference prices on the net to be quickly referred to."
"Reducing the overhead required for AppFlow data collection, specifically for HDX Insight, would be a huge improvement."
"Needs configuration processes like disabling LB VIPs, automatically disabling the IPs used."
"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."
"The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic."
"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."
"It needs proper HTTP/2 support."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
