OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Reviews

The solution is a very user-friendly tool, especially when you compare it to a competitor like BlazeMeter.

The custom meter is nice. It has a lot of features.

When compared with BlazeMeter, I use the plain data. In the cloud after one year it has been very good.

With reporting, we will see the door unlock on the main portal very quickly, because LoadRunner has very good analysis tools. You can analyze data and get the error data as well. You can merge them together and dig down into specific points of time. It's great for correlating drafts within the number of users, between accounts, and with support. These functionalities are not there in BlazeMeter.

The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools.

The stability in some of the latest versions has not been ideal. They need to work to fix it so that it becomes reliably stable again.

The cloud solution of LoadRunner is not user-friendly when compared to BlazeMeter. They need to improve their cloud offering in order to compete. It also shouldn't be a standalone tool.

I've been using the solution for about one year now.

In terms of stability, it depends on what you are using. Sometimes version 5.3 and the newer versions are not stable. The latest versions we are finding are not so stable when compared with the previous versions we've used, so some glitches are there. They need to rectify that. It was stable for two years, and now it's not.

The solution is scalable, and it's based on the number of licenses you have. In comparison, with BlazeMeter, I ran thousands of users, because it's very cheap and we could scale up the number of users easily with very little overhead.

In my experience, I've used BlazeMeter to scale up to 5,000 users. With OpenText, there are not more than 2,000 users.

In OpenText, I have worked with various types of clients. Some clients have platinum customer status, and some have gold. For those levels, the support will be there. At platinum, technical support is very helpful at updating their support and the support is good.

I also use BlazeMeter.

With LoadRunner, I use it with a paid tool, and since I am following the protocol, I need it to be easy to use. Whereas with BlazeMeter, we use it with JMeter. We need to use it sometimes if we want support. We need to configure some properties or some customers' ratings before we can use it.

The solution needs to reduce licensing costs. Its main competition, for example, is free to use, so I'm sure it's rather difficult to compete with it on a cost level.

We're partners with OpenText.

I haven't found many products in this particular niche that have compared to JMeter and BlazeMeter tools.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I suggest other potential users review OpenText. If the client has the budget for the solution, I'd recommend it. If they don't have a budget, I'd suggest they instead opt to look a freeware solution, and I'd suggest they evaluate JMeter or BlazeMeter.

Even if the protocol and API doesn't cover your need, you can always find a solution. That means you can always handle any situation with a piece of code, whatever the target application is.

For me, it's the best product for a performance team covering a large range of technologies and constraints.

The controller and analysis engine are a piece of cake, configuring the scenario and gathering results are the most important to me.

From my 15 years experience, I measure that I spend only 5% of my time to script, other tasks are more consuming: understanding the business process, making the dataset relevant and reliable with workflow (with VTS for instance which is very great), finding how and what to measure and so on.

Some features could sometimes disappear without reason. It's extremely recommended to take time to evaluates newer versions before upgrading.

We have used Performance Center for Java and .NET applications performance testing with a user load of 2000 users.

It has improved our organizational performance. We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center.

• Analysis of results
• Schedule of test
• We can book load generators.
• We can choose LGs based on the required configuration. 
• IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center.

• Monitoring tools which are available in Performance Center.
• More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test. 
• Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format.

Using the ALM Performance Center resource monitors, you can monitor Windows, UNIX, SiteScope, and SNMP servers on a machine during the test run and determine why a bottleneck occurred on a particular machine. Provides the performance of load test applications and reliably on good reporting.

It is used to empower our organisation in assisting customers, addressing their concerns, finding solutions, and providing value, thus making it possible to put customer success first, and in the process, focus on the business.

• Merging Graphs
• Layout management
• Measurement menu
• The new features are nice, like cloud testing, mobile testing, continuous testing, etc.

• New features have been added in latest version and need to be improved with the DevOps integration.
• We are expecting more flexible to use Jenkins in continuous integration going forward. 

No issues.

No scalability issues.

Support is nice, quick, and responsive.

For a long time, we have been using HPE tools only.

It is straightforward.

We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals. 

ROI is 200%.

It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools.

We evaluated LoadRunner.

• Test and resource scheduling
• Test runs trending
• Network virtualization and the new NV Insights report
• Cloud integration
• New Web UI
• Jenkins integration
• Performance Application Lifecycle

• It made performance testing for global teams work more natural.
• Performance Application Lifecycle allowed us to really build our load test according to the traffic we see in production.
• Trending shows us exactly the performance impact of our latest software changes.
• Using Jenkins, we managed to automate our performance testing as part of the CI.

Features in the Web UI should be enhanced. We should be able to do everything from the Web UI. without ever needing to download the old ActiveX ALM UI.

Four years.

No issues.

No issues.

We easily managed to run load tests of 100K concurrent Vusers on our web application, so scalability was not an issue for us.

An eight out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

I did not rate other solutions.

Pretty straightforward.

In-house.

We considerd SOASTA CloudTest.

Probably its prime advantage, it provides a centralized location for testing.

The stability on the old versions is good. On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on.

It is very scalable. No issues with scalability.

Premium support is great, but before that, when we just had general support, it was not all that great. We had issues with just trying to get support to call us back on tickets and also with the turnaround time on resolution.

It is not exactly straightforward. Their instructions were not all they could have been, but we still got it installed.

It provides a different platform for testing in an organized fashion. One of the big things is data warehousing, data analytics, you want to get from being reactive to proactive to predictive. Those are the progressions that we want to make. It's going to be extremely difficult when you start to incorporate testing platforms, testing techniques, to tooling, into pipeline, into any of these DevOps pipelines. If we can't collect the data, if we don't really know what's going on, then it becomes very hard to make testing decisions from tooling to technique to platforms. 

Performance Center innately provides you the ability to manage those assets. And it's also a different type of testing, independent of something that might be more unit based. We want to be able to test at the integration or the system level, which is a completely different approach to testing compared to a developer who may be doing something very, very low-level. Instead of changing the class.

We want to make sure that all these areas of testing are not just being done, but they're also able to be audited. Because, without access to the data, it makes it very difficult to implement solutions going forward. Whether they're new or they may be something that's up for modernization to keep up with DevOps and pipelining.

It has to be fully integrated into pipelines, it needs to be DevOps friendly. It needs to be easily digestible by management, and certainly developers. It's a developers' world, as it should be. They're the ones who create the applications and solve the problems in those applications. So it has to be positioned to be something that allows a team to make better decisions, to move through that progress I mentioned before, from reactive to proactive to predictive. Once you get the predictive you can make better decisions on how you should be teasing things, and Performance Center will have to follow the same trajectory. It has value, but the value needs to evolve and mature along with other aspects of application development.