blackfire.io vs. OpenText LoadRunner Professional

Blackfire.io is super helpful in allowing proactive testing of applications before releasing on the production environment. Blackfire.io provides actionable insights to improve code proactively by integration with the development software. Also tracks the live production environment and is able to highlight any loading issues or unusual bounce rates. Blackfire.io also monitors HTTP requests and SQL queries which again help improve efficiency for developers and reduce development time.

Incentivized

Micro Focus LoadRunner and its suite of tools, specifically VuGen works wonderfully for us for all web, http/https and web service calls. We've been able to build tests for near any scenario we need with relative ease. As long as we have crafted up requirements for our scenarios / scripts to managed scope, we've had high success working with scripting and data driving. Our main tests are web service calls - typically chained together to form a full scenario with transactions measuring the journey or a similar (measure along the way) journey through a browser. For web services we will use VuGen and browser we've shifted to Tru Client I have had little-to-no experience scripting against a thick client where a ui-driven test would be required. I know its possible but quite costly due to the need to run the actual desktop client to drive tests. We've been fortunate enough to leverage http calls to represent client traffic.

Incentivized

• Provide details on processes eating up valuable server resources
• Alert against bottlenecks and find bottlenecks
• Performs load tests in code before moving to production environments

Incentivized

• It can simulate multiple users at the same time and help understand the performance.
• It can generate excellent reports and give insights into application performance.
• It is a fast tool and does not take time to perform its functions.

Incentivized

• They count same API endpoint AND same method (e.g. POST, OPTIONS, GET etc) as different profiles
• Customer service needs a lot of improvement
• The documentation can be a bit more detailed to remove any scope of doubts

Incentivized

• HP LoadRunner with new patches and releases sometimes makes no longer support older version of various protocols like Citrix, which makes the task time-consuming when using older versions of LoadRunner for some of the cases. So it should support older version as well while upgrading.
• Configuring HP LoadRunner over the firewall involves lots of configuration and may be troublesome. So, there should be a script (power shell script for Windows or shell script for Linux users) to make it easy to use and with less pain.
• I would like to see the RunTime Viewer of Vugen in HPLoadRunner based on the browser I selected in the run-time configuration to make it feel more realistic as a real user.
• Licensing cost is very high when we need to perform a test on application for a specific group of users.

Incentivized

Customer service is not that great. It's difficult to get hold of someone if an issue is supposed to be addressed on an urgent basis. No online chat service readily available.

Incentivized

blackfire.io definitely provides an edge over competing products such as Datadog due to the level of monitoring and analysis it provides. Datadog is a great tool however when evaluating and catching inefficiencies in lower non production environments, blackfire.io provides a level of reporting that were did not find any competing products.

Incentivized

HP performance center stacks up very well for front end applications. Need more improvements for API performance testing.

Incentivized

• Reduce in bugs by 50%, more happy customers
• 2x decrease in load time for the website
• 100% performance validation before production release

Incentivized

• The scripts created with traditional web/http protocol are not robust thus re-scripting is required after most every code drop. Troubleshooting and fixing the issue takes more time therefore in most cases we do re-scripting to keep it simple and save time.
• In ideal world you would rather spend more time doing testing than scripting in that case mostly you could use an Ajax TruClient protocol. This type of script will only fail when an object in the application is removed or changed completely. This way of scripting will save you more time and helps you maintain the scripts with less re-work effort on a release basis. On the long run you will have a better ROI when you use Ajax TruClient protocol for scripting.

Incentivized