Share your experience using IxLoad VE

Scaling is definitely one of the best features of this solution. There are no issues scaling to 10,000 or 20,000 concurrent users.

This tool gives you a lot of options. It gives you hyper correlation, etc., requiring much lower programming scans. It's very user-friendly.

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional supports other tools and protocols, such as SAP, Citrix, web services, etc.

Analyses are more in-depth and more detailed, and slicing and dicing is very easy. You can pinpoint load APIs at any point in time. You can know what was happening at a specific minute with regard to your requests, headers, response time, exceptions, etc. It has great reporting capabilities.

In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users.

This solution has AJAX protocol or TruClient protocol, which gives you frontend stats and web vitals with very few details. This could be integrated further to exactly map any other leading tools for frontend analysis. That is, it needs further enhancements.

Easy maintenance would be good because now if you want to upgrade the version from X to Y, it takes a couple of days. There has to be downtime as well. Operation processes should be faster and should not have an impact for more than a couple of hours.

I've been using it for more than eight years.

Technical support is very good. We have a dedicated POC for Micro Focus. Although we have to follow the process of submitting tickets and waiting for a response, if it's a P zero issue, then we can directly connect with the technical person who has been allocated to us.

The SaaS version is quick and easy to set up. The on-premises version has a lot of challenges, especially related to the DB. You need to have a particular DB version to store the user data. Also, you have to depend on additional licensing from a database side. For instance, if you have Oracle, then you would need an additional license for the Oracle user.

The licensing is on a yearly basis and is relatively expensive.

If your team doesn't have much exposure to the development side, this is a good solution because you don't need much customization. You get a lot of automated features.

I would definitely recommend choosing the SaaS option rather than the on-premises option. The on-premises version has a lot of issues. For example, I'm dealing with version 12.63, and very soon, this particular version will be obsolete in terms of support. You will have to keep updating it in order to get the support for your version.

If you're looking for a tool which gives you more insight and you're ready to pay some extra dollars for it, then you should go for Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional. However, if you need a simple, aim-and-shoot tool for load testing and getting stats out, then you probably don't need this tool that has an expensive license.

Apart from the cost, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is one of the natural product choices in the industry. So, I would rate it at nine out of ten. If the cost were relatively lower, then I would've given it a ten.

Apache JMeter's key feature is its ability to manage load profiles, gradually increasing requests over time. This was crucial for us as we tested our application, handling unique protocols and increasing load steadily. JMeter helped identify bottlenecks by measuring response times as we increased request flow rates. This data guided us in optimizing our system's performance and scaling hardware when needed. Recently, new tools like Platinum Consultant have emerged, but I haven't explored them thoroughly. My colleagues prefer these newer tools over JMeter.

JMeter helps us track response times between request and response. As we increase our workload, response times also rise, indicating potential bottlenecks. We use JMeter to gauge when we need to upgrade hardware or optimize our application for better performance. It's effective in measuring various request types and their corresponding response times, making it a valuable tool for assessing system performance.

I appreciate JMeter's simplicity and power for performance testing. While I haven't used all its features, the ability to simulate heavy loads from multiple users is quite beneficial. However, in my current configuration, we haven't utilized this specific aspect of JMeter. Compared to other costly tools like Hewlett Packard, JMeter is free and easier to use, although there are newer tools like Gatling that I haven't tried. Overall, JMeter is simple and effective for performance testing.     

Improving JMeter's sync time could be beneficial. For example, compared to a Hewlett Packard tool that required four machines for load generation, JMeter reduced this to possibly just two machines for the same workload.

I've been a junior with a few years of experience using Apache JMeter for load testing. It's a straightforward tool with useful features, although not entirely unique. 

Scalability is near-linear, especially with custom configurations.

Setting up JMeter is straightforward, not complex at all. Deployment time depends on the code you write for JMeter, which is executed efficiently.I've used it on-premises, but it might also work in a cloud configuration

Since it's free, there's no need for extensive support or improvements in pricing.

Overall, I'd give JMeter a solid ten for its simplicity and effectiveness in typical tasks. While the UI could be slightly better, it's not a critical issue. JMeter provides valuable data and insights through its graphs, and its main benefit lies in being free, simple to use, and widely recognized.