Apache JMeter Reviews

We mainly use this product for load and endurance testing.

This solution is very user-friendly, and allows for a lot of data capture when testing.  

We also found that the test scripts that the system automatically generates are extremely well created.

We would like more documentation to be provided for the advanced level features that are available in this solution, in order to improve development.

We have been using this solution for two to three years.

We have found this solution to be very stable overall.

We believe this to be a scalable solution, although we have not made any amendments in user numbers to date.

The initial setup of this solution was very simple; the product is open-source, so only requires a download in order for the implementation to be executed.

We implemented this solution using our in-house team.

This is an open-source solution, so there is no requirement for licenses.

We would recommend that any organization using this solution for test script development, may also want to look for a complementary product to handle script exhibition.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We are in the service industry. We implement it for our customers. We recommend the right tool and set it up for them. So, I've not had any hands-on experience in my current role, but I have a good understanding or a fair idea of the tool's capabilities. I have a team that takes care of the technical aspects.

It is an open-source solution. So, typically when you don't want to make a heavy investment, and you want to do some level of performance testing, Apache JMeter is used. 

It is typically on-premises, and it has also been on the public cloud. It could be Azure, or it could be AWS. It is very rarely on GCP.

It helps them to look into several parameters. For example, when you have certified test cases that are predominantly repeated on an application, you can execute the same thing with increased load. You can see how the application responds and if there is an impact on the response time of the application. You can confine it to certain parameter conditions and then start making changes to see how it performs. You can see where the RAM or CPUs are stagnant and not increased.

The metrics part of it and the ability to write your custom code to do some specific tests in the performance testing space are the most valuable features.

It is easy to use. If you want to test your application out and not incur a lot of costs, it is probably the best tool.

Its reporting could be improved. There should be a better visual representation. That would be helpful for easy consumption of the reports.

I have been using it for about four to five years.

JMeter is probably good for lower loads. It is not comparable to LoadRunner when it comes to higher loads.

It probably scales up to a few thousand users but not beyond that.

Because it is an open-source community, their support is probably average. It won't be like the support for a commercial product. I would rate it a six out of ten.

LoadRunner is one of the prominent tools. It was formerly HP, and now it is Micro Focus. It has good capabilities and features. It also has decent reporting capabilities. Because of the brand and the capability, it was probably chosen by most of the Fortune 500 clients that we work with. There are also some startup communities or organizations that ventured into other solutions, such as JMeter.

In terms of comparison, primarily, there are three to four parameters. The first one is the ease of use. The second one is about the protocols that need to be tested, whether it's web or API, HTTP, HTTPS, and all the native things. The third one is in terms of flexibility in setting it up and executing, and the fourth one is in terms of monitoring the execution and reporting pieces. Those are the key parameters for pros and cons. LoadRunner gives you a lot more capability and flexibility, but at the same time, it also consumes a lot of resources. JMeter is relatively simpler, cheaper, and easier to use.

I don't have hands-on experience with it, but based on what I have heard from people, it's pretty straightforward in terms of the setup. 

The setup probably takes a week or two, and then the execution is probably a three to four weeks exercise.

We are in the services business. Clients give us access, and we set it up there.

It is certainly good for testing out the applications for performance testing, especially when you have to test them out frequently and make sure that they are good for at least a few thousand users. It has a decent ROI.

It is open source. There are no licensing costs associated. If you need enterprise support, you'll probably end up paying for a license.

You would also factor in the infrastructure cost, but that's not significant.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It is a decent choice from a small-scale perspective, but reporting could be better. If you want to get some performance testing done without spending money, JMeter is probably the best tool. It doesn't have the best reporting, but it is quite a handy tool.

I am using this solution for a banking use case. We have an older version of this solution. We are planning to upgrade to a newer version.

A lot of things are valuable. It is free. It has a lot of features, such as report generation and integration with CI/CD, which makes it very competitive with the other paid solutions available in the market. It is a good solution.

They can improve it a little bit in terms of distribution load testing. We struggled with it during the distribution. 

In terms of reporting, runtime monitoring is not currently included, and it should be included. They can also improve it on the reporting side in terms of the comparison of the reports. 

They can also focus more on integration with CI/CD. Currently, people are using their own customized tools. It would be nice if Apache can provide some standard tools and procedures for integration with CI/CD tools like DPR. There are some tools, but it would be nice if official standard tools and procedures are available.

I have been using this solution for almost three months.

It is stable. There is good support, and fixes are also available immediately.

We have not scaled it, but it is scalable. We plan to increase its usage. 

I didn't have to call Apache because if anything comes up, we are able to find a solution in the community.

Its initial setup was straightforward.

We are using the free version, and if required, we can easily switch to the other version.

I would definitely recommend this solution if it suits a use case. It is good, and it also looks promising. We plan to keep using it in the future.

I would rate Apache JMeter an eight out of ten.

This is a cost-effective tool, which provides people the ability to do POCs without worrying about costs.

Apache JMeter provided us with the opportunity to test applications for clients who did not have the budget to employ heavy-duty tools like LoadRunner.

Additionally, due to ease of installation, it can be installed in any client network, without the requirement for port opening.

API testing, Database Testing, and MQ testing can be done with ease.

The tool should be made a bit more robust, and better support should be made available.

I set a script reporting and execute test report and analysis on almost all stages of the performance cycle except in regards to requirements and the environment.

we saved a lot on licenses for commercial tool

The features that helpful are the coding and the opportunity to work with the SQL directly in order to report on the data. You can collect all the test data from DB with these and then do post test execution metrics collection as well(if you need DB)

RegEx Extractor needs improvement. It's a headache for many people. The solution could use some sort of educational features to offer tips and hints to help users navigate it better. They should improve the manuals and help files. I've searched the internet for answers over the past year or so, and I haven't come across anything that is helpful. The community help files are pretty good, but their own help files are not.

In the next release, it would be helpful to offer more flexible graph handling to be able to combine different metrics into one graph.

quitre stable but keep an eye on RAM consumption and smart execution tips (can see on their site)

Scalability is good, though you need to be aware of distributed and non guis test execution modes. 

It's a free tool, so they don't offer technical support. If you need help, you need to Google and search for answers on your own.

I've used LoadRunner in the past, among other solutions. I switched to Apache because it is free. Other tools are much too expensive and can cost up to $50,000 a year if you are looking at commercial options.

Now Neoload probably the best one (better than Load runner as per my subjective perception) but it's a way too costly 

please take a look at ROI and scal of performance tests. For big projects and organizations consider Load Runner or Neoload, but if you have small project, most likely you wil lstop on Apache Jmeter. Also it depends on the protocol support. But because of big community, Apache jmeter has constant income of new plugins developed

For people thinking about implementing the solution, I would advise that they know what protocols they want to work with. I would recommend doing an evaluation of script maintenance. You need to see how stable your automation disk and performance is. 

I would rate this solution nine out of ten. The solution offers a lot of plug-ins and a huge, continuously developing community that is regularly offering new features and plug-ins.

It is specifically used for performance systems. It is used for identifying the areas where we need to improve the application bottlenecks and for load testing. We are using its latest version.

It has helped us to build robust application cater to the learning domain and identify bottleneck prior go live. It helped us refine our deployment strategy and capacity planning.

It is open source as well as relatively extendable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features. Its deployment is also very easy.

It should start supporting the presentation layer. It currently provides performance testing specifically at the application and API level. It can be extended to the presentation layer, which includes mainly Angular and React frameworks. 

It should also be easy to use and easy to train people.

I have been using this solution for more than ten years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. It allows us to extend and add additional functionality and features.

We have around 10 to 15 people who use this solution.

It is open source, so I don't think any support is available.

Load Runner, replaced with JMeter due to lower ROI

Its deployment is easy. It didn't take much time. It took less than 15 minutes.

We deployed it on our own.

1. Scalable Product and solutions

2. Plug and Play with CICD process

3. Reduction in licence cost 

No Licensing cost for JMeter

Yes.

I would recommend this solution. We plan to keep using this solution.

I would rate Apache JMeter a seven out of ten.

I mainly use JMeter to check network capacity.

JMeter's most valuable feature is the RegEx Extractor.

Running JMeter in GUI mode uses a lot of memory, which means we need to switch to a non-GUI mode when using a heavy load. There's also a steep learning curve for how to use regular expressions.

I've been using JMeter for over three months.

I would rate JMeter's stability seven out of ten.

I would rate JMeter's scalability as six out of ten.

The initial setup was very easy and took around five minutes.

I implemented JMeter myself.

JMeter is open source and available free of charge.

I would recommend JMeter to other users as it's easy to use and open source, and overall, I'd rate it eight out of ten.

My main use case of JMeter is for web application performance testing as well as for API performance testing. We are customers of Apache. 

The benefit of JMeter is that it does our performance testing and provides a report without the need to spend money on a licensed tool. It's a significant benefit for us and for the project we're currently working on.

The fact that the solution is open source makes a big difference as we're working on a low-budget project. It's quite user-friendly and easy to use.

There are issues with the plug-ins which you need for reporting purposes as they make the reports quite heavy so you have to run them in non-GUI mode. If you go above the 200 user mark, the application creates a bottleneck and that's one of its major drawbacks. It means you have to run with a master-slave configuration with one system being the master, and multiple slave systems. It's not ideal and I think it could be simplified with a UI that provides direct configuration. In addition, the solution doesn't support SIP applications and some other protocols.

JMeter is not designed for high loads, if you overdo it the tool becomes a bottleneck. Unless you're using JMeter in multiple systems and all the systems are connected through a particular LAN, there is a limit.

Because it's freeware there's no official tech support but you can raise a request on the JMeter site. We haven't had many problems. 

We were previously using LoadRunner for this project but moved to JMeter because it's a freeware testware.

The initial setup is quite easy. There is no deployment process, you download a file from the web application service from your JMeter site, and you can use it. Any user with a little bit of knowledge can do it. The download takes about 15 minutes so you can be using JMeter in about half an hour. From time to time there are version upgrades but they don't affect existing assets. We have four people using JMeter and they don't have any issues. 

BlazeMeter works on top of JMeter and there is a small cost factor to purchase that. It basically gives a slightly more advanced JMeter. 

If you're working on a low-budget project and don't have dependencies of a huge number of users then this is the perfect tool. If you have 2,000 or 3,000 users then it's probably best to look at other options.

I rate this solution eight out of 10.