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."The solution is user-friendly and efficient."
"The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source."
"It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"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 potentially has a good return on investment"
"The VRRP redundancy is also a mission-critical feature that works seamlessly. I can bring down a server live with minimal downtime because of this."
"The technical support has been, in one word, perfect. Every time I call, I’m on the phone with a representative within five minutes who is highly skilled and willing to help, whether in the case of critical issues or simple advice."
"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 like the web GUI. It's very intuitive and easy to use."
"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."
"It saves us a lot of work in terms of management since it has tasks already defined automatically. That enables us to better administer our services. It is very dynamic and easy to administer."
"The GUI was a valuable feature. It was uncomplicated and easy to use."
"The health status information, with its highly detailed reporting, has saved us time on troubleshooting. We have the precise information needed that helps us find different types of situations."
"The features that mitigate attacks are very valuable."
"I found the link load balancer and server load balancer are the most valuable."
"The best part is that we are able to manage it easily. It is easy to manage and easy to integrate with third-party applications."
"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."
"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."
"Documentation could be improved."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"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."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"We recently had a problem with the tables Obsolete ARP which was observed by the support team. It would be good to diagnose and solve this problem with a patch since it is not documented that it will be solved in later updates."
"The GUI needs to be improved. Right now, the solution isn't so user-friendly."
"Support is very important because if we get good support, we'll be able to sell and supply more numbers."
"The interface implementation can be improved."
"The user interface can be improved."
"I would like this solution to have an integration tool that will convert configuration from other software, into readable values for this product during implementation."
"We’d like the solution to include more security features in the standard license."
"A feature that I would like to see included in the next version might be a better analysis when working with crypt issues. Right now, it is very manual; you load it into Alteon and it runs. It would be interesting to see a more dynamic process."
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, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, F5 Advanced WAF and Fortinet FortiWeb. 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.