OpenText ALM / Quality Center Scalability
oI would rate the scalability a six out of ten. There is room for improvement here.
View full review »MR
Manoj Ray
Quality Lead at Vodafone
We have experienced some scalability issues. I would rate the scalability as an eight to nine out of 10.
We have about 50 to 60 users logging into the solution.
View full review »We have a few hundred people using the solution from project to project.
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a scalable solution.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
OpenText ALM / Quality Center
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText ALM / Quality Center. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
LV
Leon Van Niekerk
Head of Testing at Pick n Pay
Scalability is great. It doesn't matter what the size of your organization is. If your testing area is 5 users or 500 users, this product can definitely scale. Before I joined Pick n Pay, I worked for a company in Kazakhstan and Russia. We used Quality Center across different countries to roll out a big project and at the end, we had a 400-user license to have everyone following the same process when it came to testing.
We have 17 permanent users in Quality Center. They are testers. We have a test manager role. We have automation engineers. We have test analysts, we have senior testers and we have junior testers. We also have systems analysts that we log defects and assign it to them so that they can access the defects module to validate and update the side of the defect. We also integrate Quality Center with JIRA. We have our third-party development happening, where they use JIRA and we use Quality Center, where we can log the defects in Quality Center then via the integration then send it to JIRA. When they update, we get information back on our side so that we are on the same page. For us, Quality Center is the single tool in our environment. Whatever the status of the defect is in Quality Center, that's the status. Whatever the status is of execution of test cases, that's what it is.
In terms of the required maintenance, I have one system administrator for all the products and they're responsible for Quality Center. They make sure when we plan upgrades to do the upgrades, user management, project creation, and integration with the other Micro Focus tools we use.
Our adoption rate is about 85-90%. There will always be room to grow.
We don't have plans to increase usage. We have plans to increase other things around Quality Center like test coverage, automation, and all of those things, but not necessarily new licenses or additional licenses. We have a base of licenses in our environment. As we get major projects with more resources, we do a rental on additional licenses for a three or six-month period.
BJ
BRIANJOHNSON2
Program Test Manager at B and H Designs
The scalability of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is good.
View full review »We had a team of 42 people using the solution. The solution is entirely scalable for small enterprises in the C2/C3 stage. I rate the solution's scalability of small enterprises as eight and a half. It might not be a helpful solution for large enterprises considering its cost.
View full review »LG
Lisa Gordon
IS Director, ERP PTP Solution Architecture at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
It has huge scalability. It's been used for multiple applications that we support from large SAP programs to a smaller system. It can be used as a single release. One of the bigger issues is the licensing approach. They have concurrent usage and it's very expensive. They should offer - and we've asked and they've said no - an enterprise-type license where you're not paying every time you want to bring more people into the solution that you know you're going to go over your license count.
We have to buy more licenses and more maintenance. If we could have at one point an enterprise-type tiered license, that would be more appropriate to be able to scale it up even more. People are moving to DevOps for a little bit more of an Agile approach, as well as that it's free versus the cost of an ALM.
At the peak of the project, we had about 300 people using the license as concurrent users. We had everywhere from testers in India and people offering scripts and executing testing. We also have our business folks doing UAT and our technical teams doing our functional testing. Then we have obviously our quality organization going in and verifying the results. We also have our developers utilizing it for defect resolution. So during testing, a defect can be identified, and then we have a separate type of license that's only for the defect module that the developers go in and they can find a cause and put notes against it. There's the test management team and really the whole program at that point.
View full review »Scalability is quick and easy implemented through a framework. Let's say we write a custom function
VerifyValue (oObj, sExpectedValue)
that can compare the expected value, string or integer, to an object's actual Value property. By adding the function as a .VerifyValue method to all WebEdit class object, the functionality is available to all current and future edit field objects regardless if they are in the repository or programmatic descriptions. And it is done with just a single line of code called RegisterUserFunc()
Now Let's say we now want to extend the verification to include value falls within an expected range? Add the code to the VerifyValue() function and all fields support the new functionality.
Scaling to new pages with new objects is not an issue either. The tool allows advanced users to design frameworks that can identify objects on the fly from "Plain English" descriptions ("OK LINK") without using the Object Repository. This may remind you of a Gherkin/Cucumber approach and the tool is certainly flexible enough to design just such a framework.
View full review »The solution is scalable. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. Three of our customers use the product. There are about 720 users in our customers’ organizations.
We do not have any plans to increase the numbers. It depends on our customers.
View full review »Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a scalable product. It's a seven out of ten for me.
View full review »VC
VenkatChinta
Camera Software Engineer at L Soft Corp
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is scalable in terms the database size and the repository. It has storage in two places; service level and at Windows level, the File System level. Lots of documents get stored in the Windows level, the File System level. So as long as you have good enough space, 100 GB or 150 GB is good enough. Only two limitation. One is licenses. The second is the server. So we usually recommend around 100 GB, 50 GB to 100 GB, which is enough.
We usually have 200 users using it. Usually, people buy a 50-user license but that could be used by 300 people, 300 users, because not everybody will be logging on at the same time. So scalability depends upon the license.
In terms of maintaining and deploying the updates, it does not take more than one person, probably not even that. I would say 1/4 person for this role. That person is a system admin. I used to do that, too. I was doing upgrades and configuring all myself. At the same time I was managing the actual deployment of the test phase.
This takes about one day a month.
View full review »No issues encountered, in fact, it's very straightforward to add users.
View full review »We're able to scale up and down as needed. It has great flexibility when it comes to scaling.
View full review »The solution is very scalable, if you have the right person to manage it.
View full review »Scalability is good. There's also scope for improvement here, so I would say it's pretty decent.
View full review »AS
ANGAD SHUKLA
Data Insights & Analytics Solution Architect at BT - British Telecom
I have found Micro Focus ALM Quality Center to be scalable.
View full review »AY
Ashish Yelkar
Managing Partner at Verve Square Technologies
We have around 4,000 test cases in ALM, so I don't think scalability is an issue.
We have around 150 users. The hierarchy of ALM users is:
- The admin
- Process leads, who are using it.
- At the lowest level, there are data developers and data testers who access ALM.
70% of our people use ALM and the other 30% don't need to be on ALM.
View full review »IM
Ira Mayer
Senior SW Quality Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
All users have to report their projects in Quality Center. Previously, it was voluntary to use Quality Center. From September, everybody has to use it in the company.
We have 300 users currently utilizing the solution. This number should increase to 500 or 600 going forward.
View full review »ALM Quality Center is scalable. There isn't much impact on performance when you add users.
PD
reviewer1119750
Test Manager at a construction company with 10,001+ employees
It was utilized, effectively, across the landscape, across our technologies, and across projects. It was widely used.
My previous company was a pretty big organization and had 200 to 300 users of the solution. It was purely for the technical teams, for people like architects, testers, project managers, and test managers. We distributed it with the access required by each. The defect managers and architects only had traceability. The testing teams had full access. Test manager had planning and reporting access.
View full review »VR
Vishwa-Reddy
Team Lead at Accenture
It is scalable.
We have not had a problem adding users to help perform testing. In that sense, it is scalable. We haven't done too much development around test cases, however.
Right now, we have 20 to 25 people using the solution. Years ago, 30 or 40 people were using it. We've actually lowered usage.
View full review »The solution is scalable.
View full review »SR
Sanjeev Ranjan
Tools Architect at S2 Integrators
We have found the product to be scalable.
We have between 7,000 and 8,000 users right now.
View full review »WJ
WilsonJose
Test Advisory, Management & Implementation at a energy/utilities company with 51-200 employees
I have no issues with scalability because if you want more projects, you can add more projects, and if you want more texture, spaces, or cycles, you can add them. I find it good.
View full review »MC
Mark Chase
Test Management Architect at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It has met our needs. Just as long as you have the right architecture from the old days of physical server hardware to more of the newer stuff, which is VMware within datacenters - more virtualized.
And certainly the next rage for everybody is moving into Cloud infrastructure. So things are becoming much more self-service. You're getting model scaling. You're getting the things that are making the system more maintainable. But from a scalability standpoint, you want to be able to scale to the needs at the time that you need them. The Cloud certainly provides that capability.
Quality Center is very scalable. We have over 700 active projects on our instance. That's projects, not users.
BW
Belgin Wolard
Sr. Test Automation Engineer with 201-500 employees
I did not encounter any issues with scalability.
It's very scalable. No issues with scalability.
View full review »Scalability-wise, Quality Center is an awesome tool. Quality Center itself doesn’t actually place a limit on creating projects or folders. Most of it will depend on the users, servers, and hardware and not the Quality Center client itself. But the more data the user has in a specific module, makes it slower to load on the client. Most of all, it will depend on the implementation.
View full review »FK
reviewer1644000
Executive Vice President at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
It is not a scalable solution. I am not satisfied with the scalability of this product.
We have less than 50 concurrent users.
View full review »There were no issues with scalability, but I have never managed a large user base.
View full review »ALM is for sure scalable. We are running 1400 active projects with 15,000 users. Concurrently, we have around 1000 users. If there is a performance issue, we have to find out what the reason is. It is true, in most cases, that we need an additional database server. The application servers, if they have enough power, scale a lot.
I know for a fact that it's possible to scale it up. We might add another test management tool in-house that's been there for a long time called Rec Test; a Swedish solution.
It’s a very simple test management and requirement tool. But in the long run, ALM will probably support us better, so that is on my radar to keep track of and see how we can implement them better. This will take a lot of training and convincing of end-users.
View full review »We have plenty of projects with the current ALM, so it scales well. I'm not afraid of an issue with Octane and believe it will be the same.
View full review »Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should be scalable, but I don't know what's behind the infrastructure, so I'm unsure of its scalability.
View full review »So far, it hasn't been an issue.
View full review »There were no issues with scalability.
View full review »Scalability is good.
View full review »DG
David Gorecki
Senior Specialist - Quality Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
The scalability is not great at all, especially with the licensing model.
View full review »SF
reviewer1444647
Sr. Manager - SAP Authorization & Complaince at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It is pretty easy to ask for additional memory. It is implemented in Azure, so we can just ask for additional space.
We have concurrent licenses. If we count the number of users, we have around 350 users. They use it on a daily basis.
View full review »ALM can scale and is very impressive. It can support thousands of users with a very low amount of resources. It can easily manage very big projects within thousands of people at a time. It allows and disables scale, supporting front-end operations and task management at different levels.
View full review »Scalability is good. So far we have not had any issues with scalability. For the last three years we were using it as SaaS. Before that, for a while we had on-prem, but after moving to SaaS we have never had any problems. We run around 300 projects, we have about 100 projects which are light. We've got, at most, 100 users at any given time.
We have 10,000 employees. There is a huge IT staff so we need tools that can help us to collaborate with each other.
View full review »It's handling everything we've asked it to do so I don't have any issues with scalability. It could probably do 10 times more than what it's doing for us.
View full review »We were able to have a lot of users logged in at the same time with no lag time or any scalability related issues.
View full review »JR
reviewer1625010
Software Engineer
We have not issues with the scalability of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. It is a scalable product.
In a given day, we have 50 persistent users, then another day you may have 75 to 100 people with 30 users who are testers.
View full review »CG
Caroline Gitonga
Presales Consultant at Oracle
Can be used for really large organisations, multiple test projects
View full review »Yeah, it is scalable. 10 years back, we started with five users. Now, we have 38 confirmed licenses. Over the years, we have grown from having just a few projects to having more than 25 large projects.
View full review »That would go to what I just mentioned above. We're looking at ways to improve being able to capture more results without impacting our products.
We had some issues with the scalability.
View full review »Yes, but again this mostly do with how we implemented it locally. Again, it is an outcome of the issue that the local site administrators set it up to be used in very unproductive ways.
View full review »I did not encounter any issues with scalability.
View full review »ALM has really scaled out for us. We have hundreds of projects in ALM and it's always done well with that.
View full review »It scales for our requirements but we have been finding it more and more expensive for LoadRunner. They're introducing new protocols, but they are quite scalable.
View full review »I would say that at this point I really cannot speak to that.
View full review »It's very scalable, a very robust kind of solution and we recommend it to anyone who's looking for application lifecycle kind of tool.
View full review »Scalability is fine. We have in the region 15,000 registered users and up to 2,200 concurrent users of ALM. We don't really have any scalability issues.
Any issues would have to do with what a certain server application is up to. You just need to keep an eye on it.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »An HP expertise team was put together for implementation if needed, but there was no need for them.
View full review »JG
Jordan Gottlieb
Principal consultant qa architect at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
I have customers that are small and customers that are enterprise-wide. So I'm able to deploy it in both kinds of environments and customize the tool, depending on size and level of maturity, for any kind of customer. Also within any vertical as well.
VS
Varun Srinivasa Murthy
IT Solutions Analyst at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
No issues with scalability.
View full review »JO
John ONeill
Principle consultant at Active Data Consulting Services Pty Ltd
No, the solution has coped with tens of millions of dollars worth of transactions over the years.
View full review »For the moment, we use it for our projects; but our testing centre is only in one location, and not for offshore. We haven’t had to scale it much.
View full review »We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.
View full review »It has scaled easily for us and our needs.
View full review »There are options to increase the scale of use and extra modules that can be obtained with the full ALM license.
View full review »No. Scalability is another key reason for using this tool as mentioned above.
View full review »KA
reviewer2084166
Application Development Manager at a educational organization with 10,001+ employees
The solution is reasonably scalable.
View full review »In general, HPE ALM has the potential to be very scalable from both a feature and usage perspective. HPE ALM has the capability to create project templates which may then be linked and applied to different projects. The solution also allows for customizations to be applied by individual project. However, an organization must exercise discipline in applying consistent processes to manage and govern any projects which use HPE ALM, to avoid data/information management problems.
View full review »Scalability is not a problem at this time because the hardware is better than the software needs.
Scalability is becoming more complex. Scaling involves more experienced people because it’s not easy to scale.
LeanFT:
Because this is a new product, we're not at a stage to scale something. I don't know how it's going to scale. Based on what I’ve seen so far, it should be okay.
Quality Center:
Since Quality Center is a web application, it's easy to add more users and products.
View full review »We're already at enterprise scale, so it's used across the enterprise. I would say that we're at that point.
View full review »We haven't scaled it yet, but we're looking to do that. We're working with a company now to look at some different solutions, or at least the ART tool. It's looks very impressive to us. We're in conversations about the ART tool, because we really need something like that for our analysts.
It's an educational tool, so you are able to link your education and link it with Rally. If you have a module that you want to teach, you can just teach them through that. It's a direct connection to HP ALM.
View full review »It's real easy to scale and add more licenses.
View full review »MG
Mihai Grigorescu
Principal Consultant at Inspired Testing
We have multiple clients using the solution. The number of users for each entity varies.
I can't speak to if any have plans to scale or increase usage in the future.
View full review »KG
KimberlyGoodman
Consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
The solution can scale well. If we need to add different modules to it, it has the ability to expand. You do need licensing for that. However, the out-of-the-box features included in the solution are great.
We haven't really scaled it just yet. We have about 250-300 users right now. They are largely tester, developers, admin and project managers.
View full review »We have struggled to grow with the tool, because the original model was to have just a handful of ALM projects, whereas, we have more than 150 projects. Whenever you pass some threshold, it becomes a challenge.
Even upgrading, it's a massive effort. I'd say at least a six month effort for us just to upgrade it.
No scalability issues.
View full review »The way things are going, it’s going in the direction that we would want; with ALM, Octane, and all the types of products that we want.
View full review »It's definitely scalable.
View full review »No issues to date. We're just a client (one of many project teams supported thru a central HP ALM/QC test tools support team) but the number of project teams that are supported via our central team would seem to imply that the application can scale to support large organizations split amongst multiple project teams.
View full review »Initially when we started using Quality Center we had some issues with scaling the solution throughout and updating across multiple teams but these issues have since been resolved.
View full review »
None
View full review »
CJ
reviewer1662489
National Solutions Architect at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
It is scalable. I've seen big organizations using it.
View full review »PG
reviewer1357974
Performance and Automation Testing Squad Lead at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
We only use whatever our concurrent is. We run very lean at the bank, very lean. That goes with all of our tooling. We have a concurrent licensing model that is well under the maximum number of users. If we find that we haven't got enough licenses we adjust the time-out so that people are not holding onto licenses unduly.
With Quality Center, for user scalability all we do is get extra licenses. We've never hit any sort of limit on the size of the project.
We've got a number of admin users, a few site admin users; there's one per domain in our model at the moment. They are the super-users who look after everybody within their domain. Within projects, it's up to the different projects or squads to work out whether they need what we call TD admin users in there. There are also defect-owner users. We also have some analyst users and some tester users.
We'll be increasing usage because we've just kicked off our transformation program with a third-party. As a part of the agreement they are using it, so we'll be upping the number of users that we have. And by reestablishing the centralized testing thing, we'll also be ensuring that Quality Center or ALM is used as our tool of choice. We will reestablish the standards that somehow were dropped when we went to Agile.
View full review »While getting additional licenses is straightforward, HPE's licensing model makes life difficult with customers having to submit a "non-usage" agreement if they do not want active support for part of the licenses. For example, you have 100 licenses and decide to get an additional 50; later on you want to downscale to 50, you will need to sign a document that says that you will not use those licenses even though you OWN the licenses! We found this extremely irritating and impossible to explain to end customers who were (and still are) irate. Support should not have anything to do with usage!
View full review »There are scalability issues. HPE does not support clustering of database servers.
In addition, a specific number of users, concurrent usage, or databases has not been supplied by HPE as a best practice for a maximum per node. To obviate this risk, we are looking at leveraging three load balanced servers and one standalone application server.
The standalone server would be used for third party integrations, reporting, etc. End-users and automated tests would leverage a single vanity URL with load balancing spread across three servers.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »ND
reviewer1261053
Consultor de tecnologia - QA at a consultancy with 501-1,000 employees
The solution is scalable. There are 1,000 users in my company.
View full review »MR
reviewer1137345
Sr. Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
It is scalable. You can have thousands of users running this product at the same time.
We are a small consultancy, but we have customers who are running hundreds of thousands of users concurrently with the product and have no problems with it. They are running them on a worldwide basis.
View full review »AB
reviewer1074789
Test Specialist at a consultancy with self employed
It is scalable in terms of high availability when you add an additional node because it's licensed for ALM. For Quality Center, this makes it less scalable. However, this is the perception from the vendor that the Quality Center addition is not for big enterprise. It's for a corporation, but not for an enterprise. Normally it's for bigger companies: 2000-plus users with over 1000 projects and domains. Then, they need to scale up with additional nodes, which will make it scalable enough for ALM.
View full review »SK
Sarah Kemle
IT Business Analyst at a tech company with 10,001+ employees
This solution is scalable. There is the ability to draw on the different platforms, especially with ALM Octane. However, I am more interested in the new hard platforms, so more of a container platform or solution. This is on their roadmap in the next three years, so at least there is a plan for it.
TM
ITManage0264
IT Manager at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It does not meet our needs. The product is very geared towards waterfall. Very stable, standard things, and as an organization, we want to be innovative. We want to try new things, and it just doesn't seem to do that easily.
View full review »It has scaled for our use.
View full review »Only once but that was because we reached the maximum floating license capacity at a particular time due to many testers from multiple projects logged in at the same time.
View full review »Easily scalable - we have 400 users using the same instance.
View full review »We are at a very early stage in implementing this solution. But at the moment it looks promising. Although, it is difficult to say how far it goes. But at least, so far, we have started.
We have no issues with scalability.
View full review »It scales to our needs.
View full review »PT
Pankaj Thakur
System Engineer at Tata Consultancy
ALM Quality Center is scalable.
View full review »SD
reviewer1258191
Head of SAP/ SAP Solution Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
For the Quality Center, the scalability is quite good. On Load Runner, as a comparison, I faced one issue related to scalability. We face quite a few problems in that area.
The companies that are using Quality Center are quite sizeable. We have around 20 users on that particular solution.
View full review »SK
Sai Kiran
Sr. Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
The scalability is very good.
We use it for most of the projects in our organization, with the exception being small projects. Currently, there are no plans for increasing usage.
View full review »It is highly scalable.
View full review »Scalability has been excellent, going from a user base of several hundred to around 10,000.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »No. This is an enterprise application and scales accordingly.
View full review »I did not encounter any issues with scalability. It depends on the number of licenses. If you have them all active at the time, it still responds the same way, which is fast.
View full review »It's been able to scale to our needs.
View full review »It is scalable. We're actually moving onto the SaaS product. We're looking at that right now.
View full review »IB
Ivana Buljan
Product Development Manager at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
I have a good impression of the scalability. I have been very satisfied.
View full review »Scalability, again going back, we're limited by the number of licenses that we have. If we want to have more projects, from our understanding, we just have to purchase additional licenses or purchase additional access for projects.
View full review »There were no scalability issues.
View full review »You can use it any way, so I suppose it is very scalable.
View full review »Scalability hasn't been an issue.
View full review »Mostly with the blocking of users when the license limit was reached.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »It has been fairly scalable.
View full review »ND
reviewer1261053
Consultor de tecnologia - QA at a consultancy with 501-1,000 employees
The scalability of the solution is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can.
We have about 1,000 users on the solution.
View full review »To a certain extent. We've had some projects that have gotten very large, to the point where one of them has become unsustainable, and we had to split it up to upgrade it to the next version.
The install itself, a lot of the DLLs and a lot of the times we get some updates, like Microsoft updates, cause issues with the tool itself. I think it can be improved, but if it's going to be a Windows program, something different than .net or something that's going to be more futuristic or really more inline with the technology of today.
I did not encounter any scalability issues. We regularly ran test sets with over 60,000 test steps.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »The parts that work seem to scale very well. But our use of test automation appears to have exceeded what this tool can do with that functionality.
View full review »I did not encounter any scalability issues.
View full review »We have a lot of people using it and it works fine.
View full review »It seems to function with very large companies, but sometimes there seems to be a slower response time, and it could be an internal network issue within the company, but I'm not sure.
View full review »EZ
reviewer1262124
Test Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
In regard to scalability, I think it is scalable. In our team, we have more than 100, as for the other teams, I am not sure.
View full review »Not so far, no.
View full review »Whatever version of ALM that we have, it is more than enough for what we have right now. In terms of scaling, I can say it will go beyond four to five years from now.
View full review »There were no scalability issues.
View full review »The scalability is very good.
View full review »Not so far, no.
View full review »I don't know if we're really a large scale user. We have around 230 users, and scalability has never been an issue. I think it's because we've been using it for so long that when we have an issue, we can solve it ourselves.
View full review »As with the scalability, there are no issues with QC. It handles multiple connections very easily. And also if there is a crash on one machine where one test artifact is locked, the lock is automatically released in some time. But it would be great if there was recovery options built in after a crash.
View full review »If you add any custom workflow (scripting), then in the long run there will be a deviation in application performance.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »For migration from v10 to v11, we needed to convert manually each project because the HP consultant, and our project chief, couldn't use ROBOT in Apache.
View full review »RS
Ravi Suvvari
Performance and Fault-tolerance Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
No issues encountered.
View full review »NS
Nimmagadda Sudhir
Team Lead at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
No issues encountered.
View full review »OO
Oluseye Oyede
Software Quality Assurance & Testing Specialist, MTN Nigeria Ltd at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
There were no issues with scalability.
View full review »ALM has not directly assisted scalability. I wouldn't say ALM assists with scalability at all.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »
No - We were a smaller company than most.
View full review »
No issues encountered.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »SC
Srinivasa Chamarty
Project Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
So far, we have not had any scalability problems.
View full review »No issues encountered.
View full review »I can’t remember any.
View full review »The product is scalable and consistently delivers the required purpose.
View full review »Sometimes, it has performance issues at some points, but this all depends on a million different things.
View full review »Buyer's Guide
OpenText ALM / Quality Center
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText ALM / Quality Center. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.