OpenText LoadRunner Professional Reviews

The breadth of protocol support means that you can get LoadRunner (and its sister product Performance Center) to test almost any application with useful built-in functions. The programmable scripts allow for the creation of sophisticated reliable and robust frameworks and scripts. The API potentially allows you to extend the tool to support applications that it cannot support, but how to do this is not well documented or supported.

The analysis capability is simply best of breed as it allows you to take data from any source and correlate it with your results. In other tools, analysis is more problematic and therefore a bit of a black art.

We use LoadRunner and its sister product Performance Center as two of the key pieces in our corporate tool kit along with other tools in delivering performance engineering services. Some of our customers insist on using this, and for them, it has helped administer payroll, deliver luggage in airports, and enabled them to support tax returns.

At Infuse, we have integrated such tools very early into early performance validation at the unit test level. This enables our customers to find defects early on in development, and combined with performance modelling in design, enables them to fix performance issues early and cheaply.

HP as a company has been slow to move to support modern technologies e.g. Oracle ADF. HP took a long time to support the protocol. The support could be better.

I have, as a performance engineer, been using LoadRunner since 1999, in multiple different versions. As a business we have been using it since 2002, and it features in around 80% of our performance engineering assignments along with other tools.

The tool itself is very easy to set up and install the various components. 90% of the time there are no deployment issues. The biggest issue really, is setting up the connections from the load generators to the controller component. However, these are are normally network related issues that, with the correct input from the network/infrastructure team, can quickly be resolved.

No, the application is very robust. The only time issues are experienced is when it is running for extra-long period soak tests, e.g. for 24 hours. Then, only on odd occasions, does the system sometimes experience issues with results files, which become corrupt. Usually this is because of issues during the test with the AUT causing very large results files being generated.

No, the application is scalable. Additional load testing capacity can be added quickly and easily by adding another load generator. Also, some GUI based scripting protocols such as TruClient do utilize large amounts of memory and CPU power, which needs to be planned for carefully if running tests over long periods with lots of users.

Average, to occasionally good, but no better.

HP LoadRunner technical support is adequate, with implementation issues and functional problems that may arise. However, it doesn’t include scripting support, but there is a wealth of information on numerous public forums regarding LoadRunner to assist most technical issues which helps.

As an independent vendor we use JMeter, The Grinder and Oracle Application Tool Suite’s load test module, but all of these tools don’t have the breadth of supporting protocols and so are not always suitable for our client’s applications and systems being tested. They are also sub-optimal from an analysis perspective, but do a good job.

The setup for LoadRunner is straightforward as the installations are via wizards, and this makes them quick and easy. Make sure though, that the instructions are followed as written, and be aware that virus detection software can adversely affect the installation. The most complex area is in ensuring connectivity between the load generators and the controller, which may involve firewall changes as load generator machines should be located where the users are situated or externally on the cloud. The complexity is often getting permissions from the IT support teams and explaining what you are doing rather than changing the firewall itself and setting it up. It requires good communication skills.

We implement it ourselves.

Considering the performance issues that we have found and prevented moving into production on client sites is enough to show that there is a positive ROI with the tool. This is despite the initial expense, as assets produced can be re-used on each implementation reducing the cost for subsequent releases.

The set up costs depend on the protocol type (there are standard and premium types), the number of virtual users being simulated, the terms, and the number of, load generator machines that are needed. Then there is an annual support maintenance fee that allows for free upgrade and access to the support functions.

We would evaluate all the tools on the market for a customer before making a recommendation. We do an evaluation based on the customers dynamics/culture, budget, and delivery methodology, and then offer our client a choice.

Other tools though don’t provide the breadth of support for different protocols and so this tool is limited to the applications it compatible with. It also has more basic reporting and analysis features. But then other tools are also generally cheaper.

it is a best of breed product with some minor frustrations around product support.

In many scenarios, you have to be able to run or put load on your application, and that's what that product does, and it does it pretty well.

In the old days, if you wanted to run load on your application, you would send out an email to 20 people, and you're all trying to do a load on an application. It allows you to scale up hundreds-thousands of users in order to simulate that.

I think it needs to have better reporting. After you do all the load, you really want good reporting.

We've had no issues with the stability.

You scale up based on the amount of load that you want to put on your application. No problem there. They have really good products, and I'm looking forward to the next project, HPE Agile Manager.

Not directly through HPE. We go through HPE's vendor partner, which is Checkpoint Technologies, and they provide excellent technical support.

We used JMeter which is open source, same problem though - reporting is open source. Zero support because it's open source. When we ran into a problem, no help from JMeter. That's why we moved to using LoadRunner.

We have our license pool with 100 concurrent users. I like the concurrent license model. I don't have any problem scaling.

Make sure you take into consideration how much overhead LoadRunner is adding to the load.

We primarily use Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional to create scripts and run various types of performance tests, as well as to analyze the results.

The most valuable features of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional are scripting and executing the tests.

Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis.

In the next release, I wanted to make the defect analysis part easier and more compact to view in the tool itself. For example, if there are defects in the test or some issues in the test, I would like the analysis to be more detailed and easier to understand.

I am using LoadRunner, but it's a company-sponsored program, I have not purchased the tool.

I have been working with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional for eight years on many different projects.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is a stable solution. 

We did not have any issues with the stability, or the performance of this solution.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is a scalable product.

Our company has a large number of users. This solution is used on a daily basis by approximately 500 people.

I have not interacted with technical support.

This is my company that purchases the tool, and once an issue arrives, we will contact them and they will connect with technical support.

The contact is with our IT department.

Previously, I have not used any other solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

I would rate the initial setup a four out of five, it was simple.

I am not aware of the pricing.

I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional a nine out of ten.

LoadRunner gives us real data regarding our performance testing. It's the way that the tool itself works and the way that we can have information coming from the tools.

The availability and the fact that HPE people want to help is something that I appreciate because they are with us, they try to help, they try to understand what we need and they act accordingly.

For us it's really used by a specific group of people. It's the efficiency that it gave us to do performance testing and get results rapidly.

It needs to be easier to use. I know LoadRunner so I think it's a tool that's difficult to understand. We are working with specialists to help us, but it's difficult to find those resources. They need to simplify a bit the way the tool works.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

It's good but we need to manage exactly what we need from them. Sometimes on the business side it's not clear enough. When it's not clear we don't have the results we need. The next time we need to make sure to correctly define our needs and involve them in that way.

We didn't use any other solution previously.

It's not straightforward because for us it was because it was an upgrade of the infrastructure as well. So at the same time we changed the server, we also changed the infrastructure. It was not because of the product itself, it was more linked to what we needed to do at that time.

We use OpenText LoadRunner Professional to run performance test for codes.

The solution helps my clients save time. It is easier to capture reports and improves product quality. The product helps to identify customer defects during performance tests and reduces workloads. The product has improved my client's user interaction. It has reduced peak load times.

The tool needs to work on capture script feature.

The product is very stable.

OpenText LoadRunner Professional's technical support is good. However, I do not contact them often.

Positive

OpenText LoadRunner Professional is easier to use than IBM. It supports a lot of protocols compared to competitors.

The tool's deployment is easy and can be completed in one to two days.

The solution's pricing is expensive.

Our clients are mostly government agencies and enterprises. I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I have been using Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional for approximately 11 years.

The stability of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is very high. It is the leading tool for stability.

The scalability is good.

The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future.

I would rate the technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional a three out of five.

The licensing of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. If it can be easier and the concurrent run can be included with the current total number of users, it would be helpful.

I would recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional above all other testing tools.

I rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional a nine out of ten.

It is very strong in providing load testing solutions. It provides a lot of protocol support and its reporting utility is very good. Also, the virtual user generation, controllers, and analyses are good.

It helped our organization to run successful performance testing cycles and to identify the bottlenecks of the application. It helped the clients run their application successfully and smoothly.

We would like to be able to implement the tool in such a way that load testing can also be done in the cloud.

We've used it for four years.

There was an issue that I faced with different versions of the controller and Performance Center. They should have been of the same version.

I didn't have many stability issues. The tool is very stable as you just need to check what protocols you want to test.

No issues encountered.

Customer support is good, and the turnaround time for requests is very fast. Also, they have created a forum where experts will help you without creating a ticket.

8/10

I used JMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite as well, but according to our client’s wish we went for this solution.

It is straightforward. You just have to go through the read-me document and installation guide provided along with the software.

We did it in-house.

I would say it is true value for the money.

The license cost is much more compared to other tools available, but it will give you a complete package for load testing your application.

I evaluated JMeter and Oracle Application Testing Suite, but this proved better than those.

If you are looking for customer satisfaction, you can simply go and get it.