OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Reviews

• Integrated Infrastructure
• Cloud load generators
• Analysis

• Enterprise-level load tests
• Great analysis module for results

• Backend integration
• Performance
• UI improvement
• Integration with third-party tools

I've used it for the last seven to eight years.

Stability has some room for improvement.

It needs improvement.

We previously used a different enterprise level product.

Complex in installation with many server/mc configurations.

We did it in-house with help from tech support.

The price is quite high. It also has expensive licenses, and product support.

• Analyzer
• Performance Center

It gives you a wide-ranging view on performance bottlenecks, from CPU to memory to network etc. This helps identify possible bottlenecks in the production environment, as well as the expected/unexpected loads.

Mobile testing - integrate it with a mobile UI to automate scripts and run it concurrently.

I've used it for five years alongside HP LoadRunner v9.0 to v11.50, and HP UFT.

No issues encountered, but an upgraded patch is required.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

7/10. Since 70% of the market share is HP, it is very common, and tough, to reach them for support. The estimated wait time is always at least 20 minutes.

No previous solution was used.

It’s fairly easy and straightforward. With the current version, 12.0 and above, it looks and feels complicated, and not user friendly to implement.

Through a vendor team.

The price has skyrocketed, and to stay competitive, they need to reduce the licensing costs.

• Integration with the majority of enterprise tools
• Scripting
• Reporting
• Admin Console
• Reporting & Analysis tool

This helps us to uncover some very high and critical performance-related defects, and keeping almost zero production issues related to the performance of applications since then.

Almost all the areas improve drastically with each version; however, the correlation of scripts, analysis and reporting can be further improved. Their technical support could also be improved. Recording of the latest applications is an area for continuous improvement.

I've used it for the last 15 years, and for the last nine years at enterprise level.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

Mercury support was very good compared to HP, however they are getting better day by day.

It was straightforward initially with v8.1 and various FPs for 8.1. However it was very complex with v10. It was due to the way our security suites were designed that made it very complex. The design stage took one month, and implementation was two months, and we had one month dedicated support from offshore.

It was with a mix of an in-house team and vendor support. The vendor team is necessary for the initial setup, and upgrades can be done in-house, but major upgrades need vendor support.

We carried out various PoCs for different market leading tool sets, and chose HP Performance Center because it offers better test suites for our enterprise tools, ease of integration, and it had more collaboration with our existing tool sets. Also, the technology, current & future demands for various applications, was better than the other opetions and they offered better support arrangements.

It's generally for enterprise level, however they now offer a SaaS version for smaller companies or clients.

Using multiple controllers and using random LG’s for different executions with IP spoofing really helps to simulate realistic scenarios.

Previously, we had different physical machines for each controller, and then we shifted to Performance Center. It allows users to log into a single instance and to manage all other controllers from there.

I think Stormrunner is the best example of a cloud based solution, so it may be that Performance Center can have a better, richer, and faster UI.

I've used it for one year.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

4.5/5

4.5/5

I started with HP products.

It was a bit complex in terms of administration but we got help from technical people.

I was not completely involved in implementation, so I don’t have much information on this.

I think HP has a straightforward approach.

• Auto/manual correlation
• Test Analysis
• Test script customization
• Test scheduling

Actually we’re implementing and consulting with our customers in terms of performance testing using LoadRunner or Performance Center.

For example, we’re in the middle of a project for implementing a distributed Performance Center system, with six load generators for testing an Oracle ERP system that holds about 800,000 users, with an average annual increase of 40,000 users.

Our target is to implement Performance Center, integrate it with HP ALM, design the load tests for simulating 70K virtual users that are hitting the system with different scenarios, and finally we will present reports to ERP management staff about the response trend of the system, such as virtual users passed/failed, server throughput/sec, transactions taken time etc.

I think there is a lot of configuration and customization that can come in for optimizing the recorded load test in terms of CPU and memory used and, accordingly, the service/process that are running this v-user script at load generator. This would be very helpful especially when running a huge number of v-users simultaneously.

I've used it for two years.

Running virtual users especially with a huge number is a very challenging task. The load generators may over utilize its resources (CPU/ memory) due to improper default configurations, or improper use of LoadRunner and Performance Center. Many considerations should be taken into account when optimizing resources when doing this task. For example, running the recorded script as a service at the load generator is different from running it as a process.

Also, customizing the auto-generated script in virual user generation may cause problems when ramping up the number of users. For example, simulating a generated list of variables that would be used by every virtual user is important.

Lastly, taking care of variable sizing and limitation should be reviewed, and otherwise errors may appear at certain point of running the script.

Above moderate, but HP is trying to enhance its support level.

Above moderate, but HP is trying to enhance its support level.

The initial setup is straightforward when following the installation guide steps.

I did the implementation by myself as part of a project for one of our customers. My advice is to understand the business need that would guide to a proper scope and design guidelines. Performance Center can be implemented in different ways (standalone, distributed, with/without integration with HP-ALM or HP Diagnostics, number of load generators and their location etc.). The implementor should arrange for the best and quickest setup that will fulfill the goals, otherwise the implementation would end up as a trip of trial and error, and probably fail, or exceed the time plan.

Our customers think of the following benefits as ROI of using HP Performance Center:

• Reducing downtime in operations phase that may come due to load on system by fixing or customizing their application to afford the maximum number of concurrent users they expect
• Prior knowledge of their system limitation and its break point, may let them take precautions steps at application server or network level to prohibit overload traffic that may crash their system.

The license of Performance Center is not cheap and may be very expensive for some protocols, such as SAP and Oracle. Accordingly, optimizing the license to what is only needed – in terms of protocol and number of virtual users can save a lot of money. When the load testing is limited with a start and end date plan, I recommend using temporary licenses, or a pay-as-you-go model of license, it may be more expensive in the short run, but of course it would be more economical in the long run.

From outside HP no, but inside HP there are two solutions for doing the load testing; LoadRunner, and Performance Center. The concept is almost the same, but Performance Center excels in big projects, and working with different teams besides scheduling tests feature.

My advice is to identify well the scenarios, protocols and maximum number of virtual users needed for load testing. Also, simulating a real-world load testing scenario is very important if you need to get a near-real results. For example, simulating network speed to reflect the real case. Some scenarios may require using a paid e-service, which may cost a lot when simulations repeat with a huge number of virtual users. At this point, another product called HP Service Virtualization could be used to sniff the in/out going traffic, then simulating the e-service function later after learning its function. At this point we can then replace the real e-services communications with HP Service Virtualization, so a budget-wise trade-off may be held between using HP Service Virtualization and the paid e-services. I recommend consulting HP presales to get the most proper setup with least possible licensing.

Its integration with the Application Lifecycle Management platform makes it very flexible and easy to learn.

My organization teaches Performance Center, and we find over and over that its the top choice for an enterprise solution to performance testing. Because it integrates with Application Lifecycle Management, it is a natural choice for any organization that already uses HP software solutions. While the installation of any server-based application can be complicated, Performance Center is remarkably straightforward by comparison, and for some time HP software has been known for its ease of use and, consequently, appeal to a broad user base.

Performance Center was a stand-alone server application until its marriage with Application Lifecycle Management in 12.x, when both the architecture and the user interface underwent a major overhaul. As such, it has been rapidly evolving for the past several years as HP worked through the initial UI and performance challenge in terms of a response to improve its stability, then begin to focus on adding features that would facilitate communication of performance data.

Today, they continue to enhance reporting and analysis as the My Performance Center dashboard matures, but the web-based interface is still a little clunky in terms of response to user input, especially in the Workload area where a load test is built. Communication between load testing hosts and components is very complex and sometimes fragile, making manual intervention still too often necessary should an anomaly occur during testing.

I've used it since v9.x.

As I said before, Performance Center is certainly part of a complex environment, especially now that it is an extension of Application Lifecycle Management. Yet it constantly impresses me with its relative ease of installation, and the flexibility of its architecture.

Initially (11.x) its stability left a little to be desired, but I feel HP has worked diligently to fine tune the tool so that today, the most noticeable lag occurs during the startup of a load test. Once the test is running, the tool performs as expected.

As I mentioned, I teach Performance Center classes as an independent contractor, so I do not frequently have the need to contact HP support. In my classes, naturally I hear feedback on different support experiences, and I would say they are an unsurprising mixture of favorable and unfavorable opinions. I can only imagine how challenging it must be to troubleshoot such a complex installation when every enterprise surely has a unique set of variables.

Other than HP LoadRunner, I have not. They were the first tools I learned, and have continued to use them because they constantly meet or exceed my expectations.

Performance Center 12.x is compatible with a very specific set of operating system, database, hardware, and file system options. The installation process scans for those exact options, and will not proceed even if a slight variation is detected. By comparison, the previous 11.x could be configured to use Oracle 11g (the free, development version of the database), useful when testing a trial version of the software. Now, the supported options are a bit more rigid, but still the installation process is remarkably straightforward. I have a reasonable technical background, and after working through a couple specific challenges I have now installed and configured the application half a dozen times.

We did implement the software using our in-house team, but I would advise engaging HP consultants for larger installations. The complexity of our environment cannot be compared to the needs of a typical enterprise.

The HP sales team is much more qualified to discuss topics related to pricing and licensing. HP is very focused on building long-lasting relationships with its clients, and as such is willing to negotiate a combination that is favorable for both them and the client.

HP has very masterfully re-engineered this tool and integrated it with Application Lifecycle Management to create one of the most seamless project management suites I've used in years. When simultaneously integrated with Unified Functional Testing, which also supports service testing, I feel the richness of testing information that can be managed from within a single tool (ALM) is hard to beat--despite the price tag.

• Web interface, which can be used by multiple users from multiple locations
• Groups distribution
• Good for batch and timely executions
• Results in easier readable format
• Single license can be used optimally in different time zones for 300% ROI
• Multiple projects execution
• Time slot bookings for controller
• Optimal use of Load generator/injectors

Maximum utilization of controller as we operate from India, UK and US in different time zones.

Deletion of collating test results by admin access only.

6 years

no

no

no

8/10

9/10

only HP loadrunner

complex

HP vendor

200%

Little expensive

no

no

The UI itself is very user friendly. So even though I support six different applications, I don’t have to go back and re-teach myself.

We've eliminated a lot of production issues because we are able to test so many virtual users at once. It's pretty amazing to run a test environment and have virtual five thousand users. We also need to 24/7 support for our thousands of customers. This solution gets all the bugs out of other applications so when they do go to run, they're ready.

Very stable. Our only issue is that we consistently need more load generators.

It has supported our enormous, continuous growth very quickly compared to other tools we’ve used. We also used IBM Rational Team Concert, which could not support the growth in the same way.

Not as fast as I would like, but they work with our customers in addition to working with us which is great because we don’t always have to be involved.

Technical support is the most important element for us when choosing a vendor.

I would say this is a very good tool as it allows small and huge applications to test with limitless size.