OpenText LoadRunner Professional Reviews

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.

We primarily use the solution for performance testing and performance tuning.

I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good.

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.

I've been using the solution for ten years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. I don't see a problem with scaling, because you can schedule multiple instances.

Technical support has been good so far.

We've basically used LoadRunner since the beginning; we find it more user-friendly than other tools.

The initial setup is easy. It's not difficult.

I handled the implementation myself. How log deployment takes depends on the application. It could take anywhere from a few days to a few weeks.

We started using the solution when it was version 8.2 and now we are on version 10.6. We use the on-premises deployment model. 

I would recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

Language Support
Analysis
Monitoring

It expedites the process of creating test scripts

Network monitoring

5 years

No.

No.

No.

Customer Service:

Excellent

Technical Support:

Good.

Little complex

JMeter

We primarily use the solution for a variety of cases; the use case depends on the application.

The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features.

The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive.

The solution should offer more monitoring features.

I've been using the solution for eight years.

The stability of the solution is good.

The scalability is good.

Technical support is fine.

I'm quite experienced with the solution, so I haven't had any issues with the initial setup.

There's the licensing fee, and then additional fees on top of that as well.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use this tool to test loading charges, test the load and to restrict formats.

Before going into production, we use it to validate some transactions, new environments and cloud environments.

The reporting feature in this tool needs to be improved. After using it, in my opinion it seems a little complicated in some aspects. They can make that better.

It is stable. It is not always user friendly but it is efficient.

The scalability is fine with us.

It was a long time ago that we installed it.

You must test them on different protocols and on different transactions to see if it is good or not.

Personally, I don't understand HPE’s global strategy, i.e., how to sell the services and so on. It's so different from other companies. Every company includes services and stocks materials. However, in regards to HPE’s strategy it seems to me, that they increase parts and materials and instead stock on services. This is my view of HPE and I need to increase my understanding of their strategy.

The reporting tool isn’t so good. Sometimes, we must hesitate between the different types of protocols to obtain the results. That can seem a bit difficult.

The feature I find most valuable is the ability to find performance issues before putting a new application live.

LoadRunner is the standard choice for performance testing before any critical applications are allowed to go live, preventing any performance issues.

LoadRunner is a well-rounded, polished tool – but it does need more improvement when it comes to it application of load, more flexibility mid-test would be nice.

Since 1999

No

No

No

Customer Service: The Customer Service is good, the sales guys are not overly aggressive to sell, as the product does sell itself.Technical Support: The Technical Support is OK. It’s not as good as the Pre-HP acquisition days at Mercury.

LoadRunner runs an automated install which is quite simple.

LoadRunner was installed in house.

Research your strategic requirements. Think long term, it WILL work out cheaper. LoadRunner is not a tactical solution.

Our primary use case for this solution is across many environments and many applications.

It provides clients with an understanding of application and system performance.

Real-time performance stats, analysis tool, protocol coverage, and simple integration of external monitors are the most valuable features. 

Support for Microsoft Dynamics needs improvement.

More than five years.

The most valuable features are the ease of using it to create scripts and the broad number of technologies supported, including apps, SAP, and everything on the web.

It enables us to really reproduce what users are doing in the application, not only as a single button or web service, but in the whole application. This helps us anticipate performance issues in production.

• Licenses are too expensive in general.
• They should remove the location or worldwide licensing fee. It is a special fee that you need to pay when you want to use a LoadRunner controller installed in the UK when you're working from Spain.

It's quite stable.

It is scalable. The biggest we've done is 20,000, but I know it can be done bigger.

I have not used technical support in the past two years. Previously, it was too thick and too heavy to deal with them. They asked a lot of questions without providing solutions.

The initial setup was really straightforward. You just install, make a couple of tests, and everything is connected.

We also considered Neotys and SOASTA.

My advice would be to use it.