Can anyone comment on the pros and cons of each tool with regards to load/stress testing Web applications. Ive not found many reasons currently to indicate that Loadrunner is a tool that we must keep but due its price im assuming there must be some! Is it just that Loadrunner can be used for many other protocols besides just web? Or that its reporting ie graphs or online monitoring are more extensive? Or are there more that makes JMeter inappropriate for certain testing? Reading its blurb it seems to do most of the things as Loadrunner and its free. We have also run a couple of tests using JMeter and it seems to work fine. Im basically trying to justify keeping Loadrunner and am interested in peoples thoughts.
I never consider the test tool is the most important thing. just like you go to a place,you can go there by train,or by plane, even by ship. all those are not the goal, It only is a method. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
Yes thats all very well, but i dont think i can use that as an argument in keeping Loadrunner. Currently our finance people are going to be looking at this statistic - Mercury Loadrunner £50k per year, JMeter £0k per year. From looking at Jmeter and using it for a test there just dont seem to be many limitations compared with Loadrunner.
try some of the other views,
Cost of recoding all current tests?
Cost of retraining all the test team?
Cost to projects - learning curves on new tool?
Cost to delivery - cannot keep testing if re coding so need to get new hire staff or not deliver?
Possible new coding language, cost to quality?
None of these may be highly regarded by finance but say it takes 150 people days to recode everything at say £400 per day thats £60K so you just saved £10K by sticking with the current tool.
I do not know J meter, so i cannot make the comparison, if it does everything you want in the evaluation you have done, then may be it is worth moving...I do not know enough of the exact situation to add much value.
Agile Testers of the World UNIT!