OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) Reviews

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.

LoadRunner Enterprise's most valuable features are load simulation and creating correlation for parameters.

LoadRunner Enterprise's reporting should be quicker, easier, and more flexible.

I've been using LoadRunner Enterprise for five to six years.

LoadRunner Enterprise is very stable.

LoadRunner Enterprise is scalable.

Micro Focus' technical support is fast and efficient.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

I would give LoadRunner Enterprise a rating of nine out of ten.

The ability to monitor and restart load testing components remotely, and the scheduling feature.

Prior to upgrading to Performance Center, my organization used a shared spreadsheet to schedule or reserve resources such as load generators or controllers. The built-in feature of Performance Center that does this, has made allocation of resources much, much easier.

Browser compatibility. IE is no longer the only browser out there, so providing users the choice of what browser to use would be great!

I've used it for approximately one year.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

7/10 HP support is getting better. Response times from support engineers are pretty good when using the online ticket system. The Knowledge Base still needs work: searches return far too many results, and their support site’s filtering or employment of key words or phrases seems ineffectual.

We previously used HP LoadRunner. Choosing Performance Center was an obvious upgrade for us. We also use other HP products such as UFT and Quality Center, so maintaining the cohesive environment made sense.

It was fairly straightforward, but determining how many servers were needed to host the application took some time to suss out. Performance Center is a resource-intensive app with many “moving parts” or components to consider.

We did it in-house with the help of a consultant.

Overall, I am satisfied with this product.

All of the features are available with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise.

The user interface is fine. It's intuitive.

I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected. In addition, because it requires a lot of hardware, true client-based scripting should be improved. That needs to be improved.

I have been working with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise for the last ten years.

The response time for technical support is extremely slow. They are generally not well-versed.

The technical support is awful.

There were no issues with the implementation process. It was okay.

The price is a bit too high.

I would rate Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise an eight out of ten.

We have used Performance Center for Java and .NET applications performance testing with a user load of 2000 users.

It has improved our organizational performance. We are delivering fine performance results and performance recommendations using Performance Center.

• Analysis of results
• Schedule of test
• We can book load generators.
• We can choose LGs based on the required configuration. 
• IP Spoofing can be done using Performance Center.

• Monitoring tools which are available in Performance Center.
• More real-time monitoring should be available for the system under test. 
• Dashboard creation should be implemented, so we can get the results in a desired format.

• Test and resource scheduling
• Test runs trending
• Network virtualization and the new NV Insights report
• Cloud integration
• New Web UI
• Jenkins integration
• Performance Application Lifecycle

• It made performance testing for global teams work more natural.
• Performance Application Lifecycle allowed us to really build our load test according to the traffic we see in production.
• Trending shows us exactly the performance impact of our latest software changes.
• Using Jenkins, we managed to automate our performance testing as part of the CI.

Features in the Web UI should be enhanced. We should be able to do everything from the Web UI. without ever needing to download the old ActiveX ALM UI.

Four years.

No issues.

No issues.

We easily managed to run load tests of 100K concurrent Vusers on our web application, so scalability was not an issue for us.

An eight out of 10.

A seven out of 10.

I did not rate other solutions.

Pretty straightforward.

In-house.

We considerd SOASTA CloudTest.

This solution is used for performance testing.

The most valuable features are the multiple schedule and load setup preferences in a test scenario. It is also flexible in scalability.

We encountered cookie banner issues when opening LRE.

I have been using this solution for six years.

It is stable.

The scalability is good.

I would definitely recommend LoadRunner for performance testing of any application/system with a wide variety of protocols. It's a great tool for capturing performance bottlenecks and its commendable analysis and reporting.

I would rate it nine out of ten