Everything is on the cloud and it is very scalable. We have around one thousand five hundred users onboard.

For scalability, our current licensing is for only ten APIs. Regarding the scalability part, haven't tested it yet.

I would rate the scalability of this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

The solution is scalable. Currently, all our developers use API Manager.

It is not a very scalable solution. 

We've found it to be a scalable product in general. 

I'm not sure of the exact amount of users. 

I would rate the scalability of MuleSoft Anypoint as a seven out of ten. We have approximately 20 users of the solution at our company.

The scalability of this solution depends on how you configure it. When you design the implementation of the solution, you need to factor in multiple sets of requirements and configure the size of the APIs accordingly.

From a product standpoint, MuleSoft offers auto-scaling options that can be enabled. However, the majority of organizations will control it manually to avoid unpredictable higher costs.  overall,  application can be scaled easily.

Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager does not have out-of-the-box scalability and it is not something that you can receive readily. It is something you have to configure based on the requirements of the customer.

The scalability is lacking. We're not sure if it's just this solution or ESBs in general, however, we've had trouble scaling as we need to.

We have about 100 users on the solution currently. They are mostly tech leads, senior developers, and architects.

Regarding scalability, I have some uncertainty. During our interaction with the vendor, they introduced us to the possibility of running MuleSoft within a Kubernetes environment. If we can leverage this approach, it could potentially enhance scalability. However, during the testing phase, I found that the implementation process was rather complex.

I would rate the scalability seven out of ten.

I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten. We have 20 developers at our organization using the solution, and we hope to increase that number because we are roping in other developers from our SPUs to onboard them onto the platform.

I'd rate the scalability ten out of ten. It is easy to extend. We have multiple users on the solution. We have around 100 users so far. 

We have scaled from a few hundred APIs to 10,000 APIs. Just on the retail part, the gateway service runs more than 125 million transactions per day. It's a huge setup we have. 

The only drawback back again is that their gateways are pretty heavy on hardware. Therefore, we spend a lot of money on the hardware. If you compare with Kong, Kong actually can just replace everything with two VMs. We have 500 VMs running for us as gateways. It has scalability, however, it will cost you, which is a problem.

The scalability of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is good.

We have approximately 80 people using the solution. They are architects and developers. We have plans to increase the usage of the solution if the depends require it.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My company deals with clients having small and medium businesses.

It is scalable and appropriate for every enterprise.

The tool is scalable. I would rate its scalability a nine-point five out of ten. 

It's highly scalable. It's a good technology. We have to increase and plan the capacity in advance. We have to execute our IP partly with other business because our business is very aggressive and very highly patent-oriented. To meet our business expectations, our IT stack has to be more efficient and more robust. We have to scale our business acumen in a very aggressive way. At this juncture, what we have to do is make our technologies or our applications more scalable and more persistent and continuously integrated. At this point of time, the features are being generously added. But there should give some flashpoints or something like that because the capacity has been missing.

I'm not sure whether we don't know how to configure those features or not. We're naïve about those features or maybe Mulesoft does not have them, but whenever we end up with this capacity, it has been going down, then we have to do a lot of due diligence and we have to do some capacity planning, which means we have to do some fibering, which has happened three to four times over a period of the last two years. We want to reduce that because it might impact our business. Because we have aggressive targets and loan book should be more, or I'll say we're expecting more from the customers.

At this point in time, our API stacks have been more supportive and more resilient. Mulesoft never gave any problem, but to scale up to this kind of capability, yes, we have to do some fibering but everything is going well, fortunately.

In terms of usage, I can say 1,000 to 2,000 users on day to day basis, because we have got a very big call center. They're not aware that they're using these APIs, but previously the APIs randomly show. I can say around 2,000 users are there. I'm talking about business users, not technical enrollment.

We want to scale up the user count, and want to increase our loan book on a regular basis. We're enhancing and emphasizing most on our digital capability so that a lot of customers who are entitled to and get to enroll as our customers, will be rendered loans. They will get paid online. Lots of things are new here. Innovations are being added and getting added in the near future. The customer base will also be increasing, so to make this happen, we have to scale our capabilities, and we have to meet our increasing customer base.

We didn't utilize the scalability features.

Scalability is perfect. The API Manager is used by large clients and is made to be scaled.

The product is scalable. It is suitable for enterprise companies with legacy infrastructure and multiple technologies.

Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is a scalable product.

We have 300 users in our company, and we use approximately 10,000,000 hits per day.

We will definitely increase our usage. It should be standard as a requirement model. It's not specific. We have a capability team, and the capability team gives us access to that information. We have a plan, but we cannot provide specific data numbers because of time constraints.

My impression is that this product is quite scalable. I would rate its scalability an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

MuleSoft has horizontal and vertical scaling capabilities.

I didn't see any issues while using the APIs and connectors, which means it's scalable.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It's scalable, so if we need more licenses or queues, we can easily get them.

I've worked on at least ten different projects using this. We have multiple customers using this solution. Our customers are small, medium, or enterprise businesses.

Scalability is a problem in MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager mainly because of the cost to scale it. Scaling the solution is very expensive, so it's a real problem because my company needs to create a lot of architecture to solve the scalability issue, mainly because it has many APIs, which means more interfaces and channels. After all, one API is bound to a channel point of entry, and you have to separate each application or two or three applications to improve scalability, which is very difficult for my company.

Scalability-wise, I rate MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager as five out of ten.

Anypoint is very capable in terms of scalability.

The solution is scalable. 20 people are using this solution.

This is a scalable solution. 

Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is a scalable solution.

Good scalability in AWS/EC2.

The solution is scalable.

The solution can scale if a company needs to expand it. It's pretty good. 

We have 30 people using the solution right now. 

I would think scalability depends on whether you're doing it on premises or on the cloud. I don't have experience with that but I think, for example, since Kong is more into clustering and the like, so scalability in Kong should be more straightforward because it's more evenly distributed. 

The solution is scalable, we have customers in both the medium and enterprise environments. 

The scalability of the solution is very good.

No.

Scalability is one of the key features of this solution. We're just at the beginning so we do plan on increasing usage.