Gatling Enterprise vs. Keysight Software Test Automation

Gatling requires Scala code to run high-quality scenarios. The recorder helps, but does not provide an immediately usable path. In the results, it is difficult to analyse the errors encountered during a load test. We can identify when errors occur, but it is challenging to pinpoint the cause at a given moment.

Incentivized

I would definitely recommend [Eggplant Performance] as an automation and testing software. Outside of these capabilities there are other tools that are better.

Incentivized

• Quick simple report.
• Heavy loads.
• API test.

Incentivized

• Scripting with user interface.
• More reports.
• Recording user path.

Incentivized

• Installing and setting up initially could be easier
• Reporting tool can be improved
• Fails at times

Incentivized

Our tests are only run via an integration platform (Jenkins), and only the results are analysed using Gatling reports. The difficulty lies in maintaining the Scala scripts, which must keep pace with changes in the application over time. New use cases must be thoroughly documented for testers who are not directly involved in development.

Incentivized

Gatling can only be used for high-load tests with a paid license and only for tests with a reduced graphical user interface (GUI). Unlike OctoPerf, NeoLoad, or LoadRunner, we are not limited to a fixed number of users per license. Compared with JMeter, Gatling is less resource-intensive and therefore does not require an extensive test infrastructure.

Incentivized

I have not used another tool exactly like this because Eggplant is awesome and we do not need another.

Incentivized

• Re use existing use case.
• Difficult to add other load generator.
• Cost reduction for simple tests.

Incentivized

• Very easy
• Customer support very helpful
• Saves us a lot of time
• Helps us put out better products

Incentivized