Apache JMeter Reviews

The primary use case for Apache JMeter is performance testing. We use it to test the performance of applications.

Apache JMeter offers plugins for reporting and preparing test scenarios. It allows recording to customization, letting you download plugins to connect with databases or external systems. Despite being open source, it offers features comparable to paid tools, and its ability to customize and expand is particularly useful. Additionally, its open-source nature makes it cost-effective.

To improve Apache JMeter, reducing the complexity of load generators and distribution testing would be beneficial. Automating report analysis and supporting customized SLAs for script report generation could also enhance functionality.

I have been using Apache JMeter for six years.

There are few stability issues with Apache JMeter. Sometimes, there are heap memory issues due to customized scripting using Java utilities, which requires increasing heap space. Port usage can also exceed, requiring solutions to increase the number of ports. Overall, stability is rated at eight out of ten.

Apache JMeter can be scalable for limited users but might face challenges with location-based specific requirements. Without location dependency, it's rated ten out of ten, but with dependency, it can be six out of ten.

Apache JMeter relies more on community support, where one needs to do their own POC and find solutions from online resources. We've not had to raise real issues with JMeter within the community.

Positive

Two years ago, I used LoadRunner Enterprise in the cloud before switching to a team already utilizing Apache JMeter. The decision to use Apache JMeter was made by the company.

The initial setup of JMeter is very easy, even for beginners with no experience. There is a wealth of documentation available in the industry.

Apache JMeter is completely free as it is open-source, providing cost-effective customization options.

Before using Apache JMeter, we evaluated LoadRunner Enterprise in the cloud.

I recommend Apache JMeter for smaller and medium-sized organizations without geographical or map-related workflows. It integrates well with cloud solutions and can automate executions via CI/CD pipelines. Overall, I rate Apache JMeter at seven out of ten.

I worked on the performance setting of my product, which is a product with an easy UI element that can be added in. People without forward knowledge will be able to easily understand the tool and use it right away.

Other cloud-based performance tools will allow you to view what's going on during the test. However, with this product, it's not possible to monitor live during a test, such as with BlazeMeter, which is very user-friendly.

It is very user-friendly. We just upload the script, and the dashboards are very informative. It's useful for both the person conducting the test and the higher management, like project managers or senior executives, who may not know about the test. They can easily view the results and gain valuable insights. Additionally, monetary benefits with Apache JMeter are notable since it doesn’t require a licensed version.

While using Apache JMeter, we are unable to view the graph while the test is running because it consumes resources, which is a drawback. With BlazeMeter, you can view the results in real-time.

I worked with it for five to six years.

The initial setup is very easy, just a couple of minutes.

Monetary benefits with Apache JMeter are notable as it doesn't require a licensed version, whereas BlazeMeter involves costs.

I would recommend starting with the basic tool to understand performance settings. I would recommend Apache JMeter first.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I consider Apache JMeter to be a fundamental tool in the industry for performance testing. Its primary advantage lies in being free, making it accessible to everyone. The platform boasts a wide range of plugins, regularly updated, and has a substantial community. You can find information on almost any topic in the community forums or Q&A sites related to code.

Apache JMeter is well-known and widely used among developers, particularly on popular developer forums. While it may not have the most user-friendly interface, it offers strong support through official manuals and various articles from companies providing load testing services. 

The tool is free, has a substantial community, and serves as a fundamental choice for testers, especially those new to performance testing. While other tools like K6 may be more developer-oriented, JMeter's affordability and accessibility make it suitable for those without extensive performance testing experience.

Given that Apache JMeter is a free and open-source tool, documentation improvement may not be a major concern, as it is mostly contributed on a voluntary basis. The essential information is already available. However, in terms of the interface, there are occasional bugs, and the tool may not address them as quickly as some users would like. Fixing defects and bugs might take a considerable amount of time, with users sometimes having to wait for several months or even a year for the next release to address specific issues.

I have worked with Apache JMeter for years. 

In terms of stability, there have been some instances of unknown bugs, but these are documented on the official pages and tracked in bug repositories where users can find descriptions and potential workarounds. Users with less experience may encounter unexpected behavior, but with online resources, such as Google, they can understand and address the issues. Some known problems, like internal loop issues when launching from the MacOS terminal, can affect stability, but they are not critical and usually have workarounds. While these issues may slightly impact the user experience, they do not significantly detract from it. On a scale of ten, the overall user experience with JMeter might be rated around seven or eight.

Scalability is possible for both small and large companies. In smaller companies, JMeter can be scaled across multiple machines, utilizing them as load generators. For more complex network setups, collaboration with the DevOps or system administration teams may be required to handle firewall configurations. In large enterprises, options like Docker Swarm or Kubernetes can be employed. Additionally, using JMeter images or containers within these frameworks allows for quick scalability.

While I haven't personally engaged in direct interaction with support, I have encountered challenges and utilized forums and official support channels to address and resolve those issues. So, yes, I've had experiences leveraging these resources for problem-solving.

A few years ago, I found Apache JMeter to be a reliable tool, and while it may have changed since then, I haven't used it recently for a direct comparison. Around five years ago, I had a positive experience with Neotys, which was an excellent tool, albeit expensive. However, as its pricing is now contact-based, I'm not sure about the current costs. Additionally, I've recently explored K6, which seems promising. K6 is actively developed and evolving rapidly. It caters more to a coding-centric experience, making it favorable for developers who appreciate JavaScript-based coding without extensive installations. This tool might see significant growth in functionality in the coming years.

If someone is completely new to Apache JMeter, it might take around one hour to half an hour to set it up initially. This includes spending time reading manuals, watching YouTube videos, and getting familiar with the tool. For those with some experience, the setup process could take as little as ten minutes. This involves downloading and installing JMeter, configuring Java if necessary, and adjusting path variables. The overall time may vary based on the machine's readiness and the user's familiarity with the setup process.

One piece of advice I often provide to those venturing into performance testing with Apache JMeter is to carefully consider the expected load. Due to its utilization of the Java Virtual Machine, JMeter can be memory-intensive. For extensive testing scenarios with a high volume of virtual users and transactions, it's crucial to meticulously configure JMeter, considering each element in the scenario. However, for simpler yet intensive testing needs, individuals might find less resource-intensive tools like Gatling or Locust more suitable.

If it were a commercial tool, I'd rate it an eight, but given that it's a free and non-commercial tool, I'd lean more towards a nine. While it's not perfect, I believe it's one of the best options available for now.

Apache JMeter is quite flexible and it is also well distributed. It is quite flexible compared to Micro Focus LoadRunner.

JMeter is easy to script. There is less of a problem with doing correlations and parameterization. 

It is not something that can be compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner. It gives the facility too easily; you do things through UI. With JMeter, you really do not have any easy UI to work as, like a Micro Focus LoadRunner.

The stability could be a bit better.

Compared to LoadRunner, it hasn't any proper UI. Recording the script is also not flexible in JMeter. In LoadRunner, we have a couple of options, such as URL-based recording and HTML-based recording. In JMeter, it's not like that. JMeter has a recorder, however, it is not easy to use. It is a bit tricky to configure the automatic recording in JMeter. 

I've been using the solution for four or five years. 

JMeter, stability-wise, is good, however, it is being developed by the community. Therefore, stability is always an open question there.

The solution can scale a bit. It is scalable, however, not like LoadRunner. I have not tested it as such yet. I'm not sure about how fully scalable it is. 

I'm also familiar with Micro Focus LoadRunner.

The implementation process is not so easy. It's difficult to configure.

I'd rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I'm an end-user and a customer. 

There is room for improvement in the scripting concepts. The scripting and even the results and reports were very elaborative and informative in LoadRunner, but not in JMeter because everything has to be done manually. 

And, whichever metric we need, we need to add it manually and start monitoring it, but not in LoadRunner. It was a very elaborate report. A lot more information, but not in JMeter.

I have been using it for four to five months. I have been with the organization for just four to five months.

It is scalable. It is cloud-based. Whenever, based on the requirements, we can scale it to whatever extent we need. But with respect to LoadRunner and NeoLoad, since they are all paid ones, we had to follow a procedure even if we had to scale for certain protocols or with respect to users. We had to pay the cost.

There are around seven to eight members using this tool.

I have switched over to a new company where they used JMeter. Earlier, we used Micro Focus LoadRunner.

More than NeoLoad, I prefer LoadRunner the most because I have had experience from the past 13 to 14 years, majorly on LoadRunner. 

Any of the customers would be very easily convinced with the LoadRunner or the NeoLoad reports more than the JMeter reports. And even interpretation of the results, everything would be very much comfortable and customer-friendly with respect to LoadRunner and the other tools, but not with JMeter.

If I had to compare with respect to JMeter and other tools, the script creation, user-friendliness, handling of the tools, customization of scripts - everything is very much easy. Even for training, it would be very easy with LoadRunner more than JMeter.

And documentation, materials, support, technical support, installation, everything - whatever the support- also looks pretty good in LoadRunner or NeoLoad, not in JMeter. Since it's open source, everything has to be done on your own. And the training of freshers and juniors would be more comfortable with LoadRunner than JMeter.

It is free.

I propose they use Micro Focus LoadRunner or NeoLoad. I have even put forward the proposal here [in my current company] as well.

Overall, I would rate it a six out of ten. 

We primarily use it for conducting different types of performance testing, such as load testing, spike testing, and endurance testing.

JMeter is basically the art of the entire performance testing process. We generate load on our application using JMeter and then monitor various metrics like CPU with different monitoring tools. It's the essential foundation for our performance testing.

JMeter is doing some good things with upcoming releases, but the main area for improvement is the extensions available. 

Another area of improvement is the reporting part, specifically regarding report generation. 

There are certain things like we can't merge custom metrics into the JMeter reports. We're limited to JMeter metrics, and other server metrics can't be integrated with JMeter dashboard. This forces us to rely on another tool. 

We should be able to add or custom-configure server details directly in JMeter reports.

We have been using it for three years.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.  It's generally quite stable, it hardly has crashes or issues.

Scalability is good for my use cases, but to generate a large load, you must go into distribution mode, which is more complex to configure and requires powerful machines. So, while it's fine for my needs, but the scalability wouldn't be a perfect ten. I would rate it a seven out of ten, as there are some limitations for large-scale testing.

I'm the one who uses it most extensively. And the other we have four to five people are using it just for their local testing. It's development testing kind of stuff.  

It's an open-source community. So we can post our queries there. We generally get good responses from the forums. So it's good enough.

I used another tool like HP LoadRunner. And now it's offered by some different companies, ownership-wise, but it was long back. 

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. Even for new users, the installation is straightforward based on the documentation. 

However, customizing and building something extra can be complex. But overall, it's easy enough to download and start working with.

Our main system is on the cloud, so we primarily use JMeter on the cloud. However, some use cases require on-premises deployment, and we use it there as well.

One person is enough for deployment. The deployment won't take much time. It is very fast, typically within five minutes.

We use the open-source version. 

I'll definitely advise that you should at least give it a try. If it serves your initial needs and meets your expectations, you should go for it. 

It's quite an old and up-to-mark tool with a proven track record in the industry, and there's a strong community behind it. So it's definitely worth giving a shot.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We have a couple of applications in banking.

It's an open-source tool, Apache JMeter. 

It's easy to customize. Customization depends on the requirements, however. It provides an enormous amount of plugins. Based on the customer requirements, we can customize our code and we can go out and execute the test. JMeter integrates well with Jenkins. The cloud offers CI/CD activity. 

The solution is scalable.

The stability is good. 

Its initial setup is very easy.

There is good documentation available. 

Until now, JMeter is not supporting most of the protocols. It's widely using web HTTP and a few other protocols as well, however, it's not supporting the SAP or Citrix ones. Protocol-wise, the JMeter needs to improve.

Recently, there was a Log4j error. They have since mitigated that, in JMeter, for the free version. The security concern was handled quite well compared to the previous versions.

I've been dealing with the solution for more than five years.

The solution has been stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

It's scalable. We have very good load balancing or load distribution. It will be very easy for us to add multiple machines and make whatever we need. However much we want, we can scale.

It is very easy to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

The solution does offer a free version. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We utilize it solely for load testing and performance testing. 

JMeter is user-friendly, and that's a notable advantage of JVTech. It's straightforward and easy to use, unlike some other load testing tools, making it very easy to understand.                

I have been using Apache JMeter for the past 4 to 5 years. 

The last time I used it, there were some APIs that I tested, and they were running well before. We didn't make any changes to them, but when I tried to check them again recently, they didn't go through. It seemed like an issue at the integration level. I'm currently working on getting half an automation, where I'll have separate linear and rest. But that's the situation so far.

I prefer tools that I can easily teach people within twenty minutes, and JMeter falls into that category. It's part of the tools I use to help others learn load testing. While JMeter can be a bit tricky, I find it easy to grasp and teach. It's user-friendly, and I can quickly introduce someone to it. It's a tool that I can easily exchange with others, and I aim to achieve proficiency in it soon because of its simplicity and ease of use.