Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional Room for Improvement

QAmgr9845
QA Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
There is room for improvement of the pilot processing and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner. LoadRunner also has to create a low-cost version that supports simpler testing and only some of the simple features would be included. This would allow people to use LoadRunner and get support from LoadRunner in terms of application testing. It is a principle that if people will get to use LoadRunner for free, LoadRunner will get more business and major payback. I would rate it 6 out of 10, because LoadRunner is a vast thing, starting from those scenarios and then getting more into users, putting more points, correlation, load testing, and benchmarking. I have this part and hope it works well with the system. All of this is very complex. It takes a long time to learn the system well. View full review »
Prashant Sarswat
Head - Testing Centre of Excellence at NIIT Technologies Limited
The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees. The technical support aspect of the solution could be improved. Their current dashboard and their reporting is still following the earlier waterfall models. If they can add some things in the reporting, and update it so it is more modern, that would be great. View full review »
Desil Ponnatt
Technical Leader at Valtech
If they can make LoadRunner more comprehensive, it would really help. My main recommendations for improvement for LoadRunner are: * It would be good if LoadRunner can categorize the different transactions based on the time taken to do the test, against the transactions first. * The reports should be a little more comprehensive, more detailed. * There should be a way to use the default monitoring tool integrated with LoadRunner. For example, if I have to look for monitoring I have to always integrate an extending tool to LoadRunner and then monitor my task. If LoadRunner is not driving and they can afford to have their own monitoring enabled, that would help. The LoadRunner report also needs more information other than the straightforward notes, like response time. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2021.
464,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
reviewer1394802
Performance Engineer with 10,001+ employees
I have not had a really good look at the newest versions of LoadRunner. The problem I have always had with LoadRunner — and even more so with Performance Center — is that it is not very good with agile delivery and it is very difficult to integrate. Software engineers who have been working in agile delivery have been saying this for some time, and have been having success with alternatives. Also, Performance Center has historically been quite unreliable and difficult. It tends to fail at collation. I think that is because of the Load Runner architecture that Performance Center inherited. Everything waits until the end of a test to collate and it does not always work out well. I know that Micro Focus has done something about that in the new version. But that is the worst thing that happens: with LoadRunner or Performance Center you run a big critical test and you can't get the results. View full review »
GauravArora
Lead Test Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
One of the problems with LoadRunner was always outside sharing. However, now that they are offering a cloud version, this may already work well. The infrastructure support can be improved because there are a lot of limitations with the hardware that you can use. I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator. View full review »
Rune Midtvedt
Senior Consultant at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Sometimes I have problems when I want to record a script if the application is a little special, like the login part. I think the TruClient works well and they are developing new things there all the time. So it's getting better. I would like to see an easier way to move things from SoapUI to the same addressed services and postman or something like that. Because the developers will use the other products and then the website and then load them at no cost. So if it was just one step to move from one system to another it would be a great improvement. View full review »
reviewer1445541
Test Automation, DevOps & Performance Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
I would like to see easier integration with our CICD pipeline. The product is pretty heavy and should be more lightweight. I would like to see a browser extension where we can start the development. This would be helpful because right now, this solution is good for UTM integration and performance testing, but if we want to scale then it is difficult. View full review »
reviewer825579
Consultant at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Currently the solution doesn't have recording options or sometimes we're not be able to see the recording options. So that needs to improve. I also think the solution should have more screen compatibility, even if you're using a different operating system like Windows 10, Windows 8 or Windows 8.1. Sometimes we find that there is a difference between the desktop screen and the laptop screen. So, it should be compatible for both screens. View full review »
VivekGupta3
Regional Head Customer Experience at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
My team members predominately used the product to do development but I don't think it needs anything in a way of improvements. View full review »
Arif Ahmed
Sr. QA Automation Specialist at Department of Transportation NYC
It's a very expensive tool so I think licensing costs could be reduced. I think their monitoring services in real time could be improved and made more user friendly. View full review »
NirdeshPachoriya
Senior Architecht at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
The debugging capability is difficult to use and should be improved. This is one area where some of the other products we use are better. View full review »
AmitKumar2
BI Analyst at eVision Industry Software
Pricing should be lowered on the solution. Right now it's quite expensive. The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow. If the correlation can be adjusted so that it's a dynamic correlation, it could be a little bit better and it would help a lot of users. View full review »
reviewer1415043
Senior Load & Performance Test Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
If they were able to, I would say that the scalability could be improved. If the costs were not as expensive to upgrade, then we would scale it more. The initial setup could be simplified. I would like to see better licensing costs. View full review »
reviewer1221264
Senior Manager at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive. The solution should offer more monitoring features. View full review »
AphiwatLeetavorn
Manager, Director, Share Holder at Marco Technology
The price of this solution should be cheaper. View full review »
Ray Andrews
Director at Traydaht ltd
Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: February 2021.
464,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.