UNIX System Administrator at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2021-11-10T07:23:25Z
Nov 10, 2021
I'm using the freeware version. I have no idea if there is a paid solution because I've never looked into it. I might in the future if I have a use case for it. But right now, I'm leveraging the free version, and it seems to fit well in this stack because I'm using the free Redis.
UNIX System Administrator at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2019-06-04T07:43:00Z
Jun 4, 2019
We are not paying for HAProxy support. We're using the free version, compiling it in a container, and using it. The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial.
I do recommend HAProxy for more simple applications or for companies with a low budget, since HAProxy is a free, open-source product. HAProxy is also a good choice for someone looking for a stable load balancing product. HAProxy is relatively easy to set up for anyone with a basic understanding of how containers and VMware operate. However, I find that It can be a little tricky to customize for specific application requirements. HAProxy does have a nice user interface and I also like its WAF feature. For users who want additional support, HAProxy does offer a premium support option.Below are of some of the pros of HAProxy:
Open-source: HAProxy is an open-source product and therefore free of charge. This makes it a viable solution for companies with smaller budgets. HAProxy’s contributors are constantly providing updates and customizations for the product.
Stable: HAProxy is stable. It is well maintained by its creators and a large open source community.
Load balancing: HAProxy can be used as a powerful load balancing solution.
Scalable: HAProxy scales well. It easily handles multiple connections per second without adding any stress on the solution.
User-friendly: HAProxy is user-friendly and simple to use.
Support: Although it is a free product, HAProxy does offer paid support. It also has a helpful online community.
Some of the improvements that could improve the solution:
Better monitoring and reports: Sometimes it can be challenging to understand the logs that HAProxy provides.
Improved documentation: There is no standardized documentation available. So inexperienced users might have difficulties setting up and configuring the solution.
Overall, I would rate HAProxy a seven out of ten. Its load balancer is valuable and it is an adequate solution for users with lower budgets.
Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with HAProxy. What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
UNIX System Administrator at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Jun 4, 2019
The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic. Additional logging functionality with better documentation would be helpful.
The solution is open source so is free.
The licensing fee for the entire WAF solution is very affordable with Loadbalancer.org. There are no separate charges for HAProxy and WAF.
The setup was not difficult it usually takes a day to complete for a VPC. When it comes to pricing HAProxy is free.
HAProxy is mostly open-source, so I cannot provide any pricing or licensing numbers.
HAProxy is free open-source software.
I'm using the freeware version. I have no idea if there is a paid solution because I've never looked into it. I might in the future if I have a use case for it. But right now, I'm leveraging the free version, and it seems to fit well in this stack because I'm using the free Redis.
It is free of cost.
HAProxy is free in the initial offer. However, pricing can be improved.
We are not paying for HAProxy support. We're using the free version, compiling it in a container, and using it. The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial.