Apache JMeter Reviews

We use the tool for data load testing. 

Most of our products and the entire industry operate on APIs now. The end user interacts with the user interface, but the entire backend runs on APIs. Even when one application needs to interact with another, we use APIs. It's an API-driven world, and Apache JMeter supports API testing.

We had some challenges testing HTTP/2 APIs, which are becoming more prevalent with advancements like 5G. So, we added another plugin to help with HTTP/2 API load testing. Apache JMeter, with additional plugins, now supports HTTP/2, which is critical as everyone moves from HTTP/1 to HTTP/2.

We used many features, and we like all of them. It's hard to say which one is better than the other. The ability to simulate heavy loads from multiple users is definitely a standout. We can increase the number of threads, ramp up, ramp down, and run stable load tests. We've validated all these use cases.

The tool's reports are user-friendly and self-explanatory. It has good visualization aspects as well. 

Performance and stability are key industry requirements. Often, functionality testing is prioritized, but performance and stability are crucial once the product is in production.

To the best of my knowledge, the documentation could be improved. It should be enhanced to better support newcomers. Currently, only people with some experience can easily understand the content. Including more sample programs, applications, and use cases would help many more people adapt to using the solution.

I have been using the product for a few years.  

I rate the product's stability a nine out of ten. 

The scalability can be viewed from one instance and multiple instances. We haven't explored the multiple instances part, so I can't speak to that. However, with a single instance, we've been able to get good performance, explore all the features, and cater to our use cases.

I haven't contacted the tech support yet. We search the internet or call experts for help. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. You need to follow the user documentation to deploy it. 

The solution can be deployed with the help of in-house engineers. 

The tool is open-source. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. I recommend it wherever I go. 

We use Apache JMeter to test the performance of our platforms and applications.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free. If not for that, we would be using a different tool.

The graphical user interface could be improved.

In this tool, automation in general is almost non-existent. Everything is done manually. I would advise those who put this together to try to simplify it for their end users, such as being able to automate at their desks. Such as manual relations and social management.

Purely on the feature set, it lacks automation, therefore it requires a lot of manual work.

As a performance engineer, I use it almost every day.

I have been using Apache JMeter for two years.

Apache JMeter seems to be stable enough.

In terms of scalability, we haven't pushed it to a large scale yet.

The majority of users are performance engineers, but there are also some developers.

There are four performance engineers and at least three developers who use JMeter on occasion.

We intend to increase usage, but it is already being used exclusively and extensively.

There is no technical support program for Apache JMeter. There is only an online community of people who help one another.

The community is helpful and fairly advanced.

In the past, I used to use various tools, primarily LoadRunner.

When I changed jobs, and the new company only used JMeter because we didn't have a license for LoadRunner, I started working with Apache JMeter.

The initial setup was very easy.

We used it on a desktop computer. It is also used in the cloud. The idea behind using it in the cloud was to spread loads across multiple machines.

We carry out the deployment ourselves.

We have one performance engineering consultant who maintains this solution.

That would not be applicable because it is a free solution.

Licensing costs are rare.

There are operational costs related to using Amazon Cloud, but the tool itself.

I looked into other options, such as Bluehost, SmartBear, Epic, and LoadRunner but Jmeter proved to be sufficient for our needs.

We chose JMeter based on its pricing structure.

My advice is that it requires a fairly consistent amount of initial learning. It is not simple to learn.

I would rate Apache JMeter a three out of ten.

Load testing is something that we used to do on Apache JMeter. We have regular releases every two weeks with varying features and modules. For major releases, where most of the EPS are modified or new features are introduced with new pages, we perform a performance test once every three to four months. We have a fixed schedule for performance testing before the sale, such as Thanksgiving and Black Friday, to ensure stability and performance during the sales period.

It is an open-source tool that is easy to use. It can be easily integrated with multiple tools, including Selenium. The tool also provides a recording and playback feature, along with the ability for modification and parameterization. Since it is an open-source tool, it can be easily integrated with many other tools, such as BlazeMeter, making the integration process very helpful.

The UI of the solution needs to be better. The UI takes up a lot of our bandwidth. So, we always run on the command line. Hence, improving the UI is needed. If it can be more lightweight, the editing can also be made easier.

I have been using Apache JMeter for four to five years.

Apache JMeter is a stable tool. Around 10,000-12,000 users are using the tool. One can increase its usage, but we haven't done so since we will need multiple machines to be connected to a network to generate the load. So, we haven't exceeded its use beyond 10,000 users.

Apache JMeter is a scalable tool.

We haven't used the solution's technical support.

We used other solutions in the past, but they were costly since they require a license, whereas Apache JMeter is free. Hence, we prefer Apace JMeter.

The solution's initial setup process was straightforward since setup can be done by opening a JAR file. It can be deployed in half an hour. Experienced people can deploy it in 15-20 mins, and newer ones may take up to an hour.

Also, we don't deploy on any server. Normally, the tests are on local ones.

For deployment and maintenance, you need knowledge of scripting and APIs. But otherwise, maintenance should be easy. Once you record and have the script ready, until and unless there are modifications to the application, maintaining it should not be much hassle.

The implementation was done in-house.

There is no investment as such. Only the resourcing part is there in the tool.

Apache JMeter is a free tool.

I recommend Apache JMeter to others who want to use it. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

I use Apache JMeter primarily for performance testing projects. It is a day-in, day-out tool where we run performance test executions to create a production-like load on systems. We analyze the results and share recommendations with customers. We use it for load testing, stress testing, and endurance testing on systems.

Apache JMeter helps us meet our requirements for performance testing by allowing us to create scripts and run them. It is part of our daily routine, and it provides us the capability to test using different protocols like gRPC, which is essential for our operations.

The most valuable features of Apache JMeter include SCTP sampler, throughput controllers, stepping up thread group, parallel controller, timers, and the ability to use gRPC protocol. These features meet our requirements and allow us to effectively create and run our performance testing scripts.

Apache JMeter has room for improvement in handling larger infrastructures as it consumes a lot of CPU and memory. It requires integration with other tools for live metrics, which is time-consuming. 

Also, the failure response times are calculated in the overall response time analysis, which should be separate. Better script maintenance and integration with ALM or repository tools would be beneficial.

I have been using Apache JMeter for about 14 years.

Apache JMeter is generally stable, with a high stability rating of nine out of ten. Any instability could impact timelines, project deadlines, releases, and revenues.

While Apache JMeter can scale to the required number of user loads, it requires a lot of manual work and larger infrastructure, which are challenges to its scalability.

There is no dedicated support team for Apache JMeter as it is an open-source tool. We rely on community support, which is not enough and needs to be improved.

Positive

I previously used LoadRunner. We switched due to customer preference for a commercial tool.

The initial setup of Apache JMeter is rated between eight and nine out of ten. If you have knowledge, it's an easy setup.

No specific team is required to maintain Apache JMeter. Performance test engineers familiar with the tool can maintain it.

Apache JMeter is an open-source tool, so there are no costs associated with its setup, pricing, or licensing.

We evaluated NeoLoad and found LoadRunner to be more realistic than NeoLoad and Apache JMeter.

For those looking into open source, JMeter is an excellent tool and should be the first option. For commercial needs, BlazeMeter is a good choice, or LoadRunner is a good choice for a commercial setup.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

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 use the solution for performance and security testing.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to install and automate functions with ease.

They should improve the solution on its UI front.

 We have been using the solution for six years.

I rate the solution's stability as a seven or eight.

We are an enterprise business using the solution. It flips a bit whenever we add more than 10,000 virtual users to the solution. It becomes impossible to get the expected result. We have to use distributed testing to deal with the issue. I rate the solution's scalability as a six.

We check with the solution's community support forum in case of any queries. It is very active.

We tried out solutions such as LoadRunner and NeoLoad. As these were commercial tools, we settled for JMeter. Also, the reviews from those who have used the solution helped us switch to it.

I rate the solution's initial setup as an eight. It is easy.

Regarding deployment, you have to download the installation file and save it in the system. If it has specific prerequisites, such as installing Java, you need to ensure it is compatible with JMeter's current version.

The solution is free of cost as it is open source.

The solution works well for small or medium applications but not with 10,000 or more footfall. I rate the solution as a seven.

We have a Neotys slave server configuration where we have one server that caters to three servers, and we test most of the load on Apache JMeter, particularly for a hundred users. We test the load for web applications, services, and the rest of the APIs, though our current setup for Apache JMeter isn't that big.

Initially, Apache JMeter had a complex configuration; its UI was tricky and required a lot of resources. Creating scripts and running tests on Apache JMeter was always confusing, but nowadays, with more documentation and UI enhancements, Apache JMeter has improved. Previously, recording and creating scripts was tricky, and you had to do it manually. Now there's a recording facility in Apache JMeter that lets you create and modify scripts and test faster, which helped improve my organization.

To me, what's most valuable in Apache JMeter is that it's a lightweight tool for application testing. It's the best load-testing tool for my company because Apache JMeter simulates your application during testing. Apache JMeter also creates threads with good server utilization. Apache JMeter allows you to focus on analyzing the situation, looking into measurements, response time, and client-server responses, which I find valuable.

Both scalability and stability could be improved in Apache JMeter.

What I'd like to see in Apache JMeter in the future is ease of use in terms of scripting. A recording capability similar to what LoadRunner offers, where you can record scripts, make some modifications, then the script will be ready, is another advanced feature I'd like Apache JMeter to have. The two features would make it easier for new users to learn how to use Apache JMeter and help users utilize the tool more quickly.

I've been using Apache JMeter for more than six or seven years.

Apache JMeter isn't as stable because it sometimes crashes when you're running a test. The performance of Apache JMeter could be improved because testing on it isn't always as smooth sailing.

The tool is partially stable. You can't expect Apache JMeter to run well for enterprise-level, high-load applications. It's a good tool for more straightforward or lightweight web applications but not for CRM-type applications.

Scalability-wise, Apache JMeter could be improved because if you try to implement it on multi-servers, the threads running on the tool don't hold up well.

We used LoadRunner before using Apache JMeter. As Apache JMeter is open source, and we only needed to test lightweight applications, we were pretty sure we wanted to go with Apache JMeter.

Apache JMeter is an open-source tool that you can install directly from the web with binary files, so setting it up on one to two machines is easy. The setup could be tricky if you hook Apache JMeter to three or more different machines, and it's also tricky when you execute it after.

We implemented Apache JMeter in-house.

I've seen ROI from Apache JMeter, mainly because it doesn't cost much to maintain, and we can use it on a few lightweight applications.

We didn't pay licensing fees for Apache JMeter because it's an open-source tool. We only paid for the machines where we installed Apache JMeter modules.

I have experience with Apache JMeter, with version 5.5. as the most recent version I've used.

Apache JMeter is deployed on-premises, but my company did a POC with Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter. BlazeMeter is a CA proprietor tool where you can hook up Apache JMeter scripts. BlazeMeter is a cloud-based tool where you can run tests with the help of Apache JMeter scripts.

At the moment, only two people use Apache JMeter within my company. Two people can handle the deployment of Apache JMeter, while only one person is required to maintain it.

My advice to people looking into implementing Apache JMeter is to make the decision based on the application portfolio. For example, if it's more diverse, then using Apache JMeter could be tricky, but if you're only testing lightweight applications, Apache JMeter will be a viable solution.

Apache JMeter requires minimal investment, yet it has some returns, and it's a good tool, so I'm rating it as seven 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.