Compare HAProxy vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway

HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers with 12 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers with 2 reviews. HAProxy is rated 9.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Multiple algorithms load-balance HTTP and TCP requests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "Stable and simple to use with good technical support". HAProxy is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, NGINX Plus and Citrix NetScaler ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with F5 BIG-IP, AWS WAF and F5 Advanced WAF.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Use Microsoft Azure Application Gateway? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers. Updated: March 2020.
408,154 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
It solves a problem for me where I can build files, not based on the health of the check, but rather the speed of the check.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.Advanced traffic rules, including stick tables and ACLs, which allow me to shape traffic while it's load balanced.Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable.The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services.We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host.It reduced the load on our main load balancers.We did not need technical support because the documentation is good.

Read more »

The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects.We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities.

Read more »

Cons
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 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.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 web stats UI, which provides the status of the health and numbers, could greatly benefit from having a RESTful interface to control the load-balanced nodes. Although there is a hack around the UI (by issuing a POST request to HAProxy with parameters), a RESTful interface would greatly improve the automation process (through Chef and Ansible).I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available.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.​It needs proper HTTP/2 support.​

Read more »

The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive.The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial.I think that the pricing is very fair, I would definitely recommend buying the Enterprise license.We use NGINX as well. However, because the health checks are a paid feature, I like to avoid it whenever possible​.If you don't have expertise then go with the licensed version. Otherwise, open-source is the best solution.

Read more »

Information Not Available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers solutions are best for your needs.
408,154 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
17,213
Comparisons
12,314
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
251
Avg. Rating
9.0
Views
5,378
Comparisons
4,787
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
393
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Also Known As
HAProxy Community Edition, HAProxy Enterprise Edition, HAPEEAzure Application Gateway
Learn
HAProxy
Video Not Available
Microsoft
Overview

HAProxy is the most widely used software load balancer and application delivery controller in the world. The core HAProxy application delivery engine is an open source project chiefly maintained by HAProxy Technologies and assisted by a thriving open source community. HAProxy Community Edition is available for free at haproxy.org. HAProxy Enterprise Edition is packaged with additional enterprise class features, services and premium support from HAProxy Technologies.

Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.

Offer
Learn more about HAProxy
Learn more about Microsoft Azure Application Gateway
Sample Customers
Booking.com, GitHub, Reddit, StackOverflow, Tumblr, Vimeo, YelpLilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell,
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Marketing Services Firm22%
Retailer22%
Media Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company32%
Healthcare Company15%
Comms Service Provider12%
Media Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company44%
Comms Service Provider11%
Media Company9%
Government6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business20%
Midsize Enterprise55%
Large Enterprise25%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise2%
Large Enterprise70%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers. Updated: March 2020.
408,154 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers 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.