My main use case for BlazeMeter revolves around working on a web application with lots of data on the backend. I use BlazeMeter for performance testing, load testing, and endurance testing to ensure that any heavy load on our website is easily handled. I utilize BlazeMeter to determine what configuration I may need to enhance, such as horizontal or vertical integration, and I gather data on how it performs under the proper user load I send to BlazeMeter for specific APIs and pages.

A specific example of how I have used BlazeMeter for performance testing involves an e-commerce application in my current company that sells clothes. During the recent Black Friday, I noticed an increased load, and to prepare, I conducted spike testing and endurance testing. These tests help ensure our website can handle sudden load increases without crashing, especially when I tested various scenarios using BlazeMeter before the Black Friday event, confirming that everything functioned properly despite the heavy user traffic.

BlazeMeter offers numerous features, but the ones that stand out to me include its ease of use, predefined configurations for high-scale performance testing that can be executed quickly, AI-powered testing, scriptless testing, and accurate API testing with an auto-correction plugin to ensure the accuracy of the tests performed.

While I cannot pinpoint a single favorite feature, I find myself using parallel execution frequently because this feature allows multiple tests to be run at once, greatly enhancing my workflow. BlazeMeter effectively handles dependency in microservice architecture, for example, linking one API to another to manage response flows, such as the login and registration APIs, which flows efficiently through BlazeMeter.

BlazeMeter has positively impacted my organization by reducing the time required for testing due to its robust features that yield efficient results. Unlike JMeter, which has limitations on user simulations, BlazeMeter allows me to test any number of users, helping my e-commerce website manage unpredictable traffic loads effectively while delivering accurate results I can trust to improve my systems.

BlazeMeter meets my needs very well, but an area for improvement would be the ability to execute multiple projects simultaneously. I often have several projects that require performance testing, and being able to execute those tests for all projects at the same time would be a fantastic feature.

Currently, my integration mostly involves Jenkins. With advancements like AI Cloud and GitHub Copilot, if BlazeMeter could automate integration across multiple pipelines and fetch the latest builds automatically, it would significantly enhance my experience.

I have been using BlazeMeter for around six months, and before that, I used JMeter. I have knowledge of both tools, but I notice some challenges I face in JMeter that are overcome by BlazeMeter, so I primarily use BlazeMeter.

BlazeMeter is incredibly stable and delivers accurate results consistently.

BlazeMeter provides excellent scalability, allowing me to adjust according to my needs without any issues.

Customer support for BlazeMeter is commendable, offering 24/7 assistance. Whenever I reach out via email, I receive a speedy response, which is a crucial aspect for any tool.

Previously, I used JMeter, an open-source tool, but I switched due to its limitations. For example, it only supported a limited number of users, and its results were often inaccurate. By using BlazeMeter, I overcome these issues effectively.

Before utilizing BlazeMeter, I need to set up configurations, including ramp-up and down times and determining the actual user load and time period for the load to be sent to the system. I test APIs by sending data directly through the API or performing load testing using my UI/UX pages that are API integrated. After execution, I receive accurate reports that help me identify what resources, such as CPU or RAM, I need to increase, focusing on response time and throughput to inform my decisions on whether horizontal or vertical scaling is necessary.

BlazeMeter has positively affected my ROI, significantly saving time, resources, and money. As a result of the time saved in testing, I can reduce my resources, and ultimately by streamlining my workflow, I can also decrease labor costs.

Regarding pricing, it is favorable compared to other tools, providing good value. The licensing is flexible, with options for one or two-year terms based on user requirements, and BlazeMeter occasionally offers discounts, which is excellent.

I recommend BlazeMeter to anyone looking to save time, money, and achieve accurate results with diverse features. I believe I have addressed all relevant points regarding BlazeMeter. I give this product a rating of 8.

I have started to work with Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter for performance testing. BlazeMeter has provided me with a vast platform for running performance tests via the cloud, allowing me to upload JMeter script files and execute performance tests based on my requirements.

BlazeMeter has provided me with a vast cloud platform to run JMeter script files, eliminating the need for storage or load providers. BlazeMeter integrates with JMeter via multiple plugins, which streamlines performance testing, test monitoring, and report sharing. It also generates random test data, such as credit card numbers, on the fly. This setup saves me time and effort.

BlazeMeter could improve by consolidating features into existing plugins instead of developing separate plugins for similar tasks. For instance, the extra CSV random dataset plugin could be integrated with a simple checkbox in the existing CSV dataset plugin to read files randomly. Such integration would simplify the processes.

I have worked with BlazeMeter on and off for the past four to five years, but I have been using it continuously for the past two months.

I would rate the stability of BlazeMeter as eight out of ten, indicating that it is a stable and reliable solution.

BlazeMeter is quite scalable, and I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.

The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating. I would rate it as a seven because they respond once they are available.

Before BlazeMeter, I was doing distributed load testing locally on my machine, which constrained my resources. BlazeMeter allowed me to handle loads beyond my local machine's capabilities.

The initial setup was straightforward, with BlazeMeter operational within minutes upon uploading the necessary files.

BlazeMeter's pricing depends on the type of account used. They offer multiple account types, with cost variations based on features accessible under each account.

I did not evaluate other products as I have already used BlazeMeter for multiple projects.

Based on my experience, I recommend BlazeMeter to others. Overall, I rate the solution as eight out of ten.

I primarily use BlazeMeter for performance testing. I utilize the BlazeMeter plugin for recording, but not extensively for testing itself.

I have recommended it to clients and used it once for a specific requirement when I needed to simulate higher loads.

One key advantage of using BlazeMeter is that it does not require me to manage my own infrastructure. It provides the ability to use hosts which are pre-deployed globally. Since BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter, it is beneficial for large-scale performance testing without infrastructure overhead. Moreover, some features like reporting are available out of the box in BlazeMeter.

BlazeMeter should improve or make available some features out of the box that JMeter requires customization for. The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.

Additionally, if there is no host in preferred locations such as some Asian or Middle Eastern countries, it might not be convenient to use BlazeMeter.

I used BlazeMeter for about a week for a specific requirement that involved a higher load.

BlazeMeter provides stability by removing the need to manage infrastructure, offering cloud-based operations instead.

BlazeMeter allows me to select hosts globally depending on the workload and has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.

I did not need to contact BlazeMeter's customer service as my usage was quite specific and clear, along with prior experience with JMeter.

I have previously used JMeter extensively, and BlazeMeter was used once I addressed all the issues in JMeter and required higher load capabilities.

The initial setup with BlazeMeter is straightforward. The main challenge in performance testing lies more in script creation than in setup or execution.

I did not engage any external implementation team for BlazeMeter.

BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.

I have worked with other tools like LoadRunner and NeoLoad for performance testing.

If BlazeMeter offered a free version with limitations similar to JMeter, I would find it beneficial to avoid infrastructure concerns.

I rate BlazeMeter at eight out of ten, due to not having used the most recent version.

We use BlazeMeter for performance testing.

BlazeMeter helps us to easily scale up the products for performance testing and increases the scalability of the applications, which are outside of the corporate network.

The user interface is good. The multitask user and cloud missions testing are nice features.

The scalability features still need improvement. They have recently added dynamic user features, so we should evaluate that, which may enhance scalability. Storage capacity should be increased.

There is a shared file repository with a limit of 999 file storage along with each payload, which is a maximum of fifty MB. That should be increased. When we run JMeter scripts in BlazeMeter, the BlazeMeter user interface does not recognize the property files we use in JMeter. This needs to be addressed.

I have been working with BlazeMeter for five years.

BlazeMeter's scalability features need improvement. They have added the dynamic user feature recently, and we should evaluate this feature for better scalability.

The technical support is very good. I would give them ten out of ten.

I have worked with LoadRunner and BlazeMeter simultaneously.

BlazeMeter's pricing is competitive but can be negotiable.

I have worked with LoadRunner simultaneously with BlazeMeter.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution’s most valuable feature is the dashboard.

BlazeMeter does not provide integration with the Aternity tool. The solution has the capability to work with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, and New Relic. However, it does not have the option to integrate with Aternity.

I have been using BlazeMeter for the last one and a half years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

Around 800 users use the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution a seven to eight out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is straightforward and not time-consuming. It's easy to upload all scripts and everything we do on-premises to BlazeMeter. It is also easy to prepare whatever scenario we need.

We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution.

Around 1,500 technical staff are needed for the solution’s deployment and maintenance. We mainly use BlazeMeter for performance testing and to generate the load from multiple locations. The automation and manual testing teams can also use the same tool for their automation testing or manual testing. So, BlazeMeter could be a single platform for multiple teams.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the platform for performance and load testing to ensure our applications can handle varying traffic levels.

The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based nature, which allows us to conduct tests without relying on local resources.

Additionally, linking reports with Slack for notifications has greatly benefited our team’s communication.

The product could improve in areas such as mobile testing and the integration of AI analytics.

I have been using BlazeMeter for about two weeks.

The product is stable.

Our entire platform is on the Google Cloud Platform (GCP), and BlazeMeter’s ability to handle various load requirements seamlessly has been beneficial.

We have used JMeter and Gatling in the past.

The platform was easy to configure and integrate into our existing pipelines.

We implemented the platform with the help of our in-house DevOps team.

The product pricing is reasonable.

I recommend BlazeMeter for its ease of setup and integration into continuous testing pipelines.

I rate it a nine out of ten.

My organization has BlazeMeter licenses and we do all of our performance integration on BlazeMeter. We're not working on continuous integration. We are mostly working on an agile workflow. We don't have a CI/CD pipeline as of now.

The largest test I have executed is with 6,000 users. It provides the advantage of using any tool workflow or LoadRunner performance center. It's the enterprise version. If you are using plain packaging meters, not BlazeMeter, you have to grow your instances, either on cloud or on-prem or one of those particular places. You have to do the setup and activities, monitor the activities, and do the housekeeping on the server.

There is a repository of all the scripts that we have created. You can go back and compare tests to see what the tests looked like. If I want to compare something with whatever happened six months or one year back, I can do that.

We do a lot of extensive testing on multiple products. For example, I'm part of the ServiceNow Platform. We can work with multiple products, multiple features, and multiple add-ons. So we require a lot of extensive testing activity and over the years, it has improved a lot. It has more protocols. It's catering to more technologies now.

You can create pretty realistic scenarios by bringing multiple scripts into one test. You can make a realistic load.

The reporting and analytics capabilities helped identify performance bottlenecks. It has features where you can integrate JMeter into your plugins, which you can use to integrate with the test and you can do real-time monitoring. We have done that. Right now, within our team, we have a Grafana dashboard, which helps us do real-time monitoring of tests.

The support could be better. It's still not up to the mark. You have to raise tickets and they take too long to respond. In our industry, time is money. I can't wait for them to get back to me with a solution that may not even help me out.

The underlying product is JMeter and JMeter needs to support more protocols, especially now that we come into an AI-heavy reality. If you have scenarios that require testing on AI, there's a limitation. Ultimately, if this doesn't change, people would have to do activities manually.

I've used the solution for five to six years at this point.

We haven't had a problem with stability. We haven't seen any initial glitches.

Scaling is not a problem. You can scale up to 10,000 or 15,000 users, and it's not a problem, provided you have the licenses to do so.

Support could be faster.

I have used other solutions. BlazeMeters scores in a lot of areas over others. However, when it comes to performance, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach. BlazeMeter is easier to operate, which is why many organizations use it. That said, tools like LoadRunner and Mule also have their own advantages.

The solution is easy to work with. Anybody can set it up. There is some maintenance needed since you are creating automation scripts and all automation scripts require some maintenance.

We have witnessed ROI in terms of performance. I have a client that does a lot of business online, and their website is very image-heavy. They made some changes, deployed it, and it crashed twice. The outage was for a little over an hour, which doesn't seem to be much, but when a company operates 24/7, it ends up incurring losses when crashes happen. They also had to compensate for the loss to users based on their agreement structure. If you can reduce the time on issues like that by doing heavy-duty performance testing, you can make a lot of changes and tune things and avoid outages.

They have very competitive licensing agreements. I'm not sure of the client pricing; however, I'm sure it works out to be pretty cheap.

We're BlazeMeter partners.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

BlazeMeter is user-friendly and excellent. My company prefers the licensed version of BlazeMeter, which I occasionally use for scripting and designing on the CentOS site, specifically for creating real-world scenarios.

In LoadRunner, we currently cannot create realistic user load behavior as effectively.

I use BlazeMeter occasionally, depending on the project. It's not used for everything but when necessary, especially with JMeter, for specific testing scenarios. So, my use cases depend on and vary according to the project.

In load testing, BlazeMeter is utilized to create realistic user behavior. It's particularly friendly for web LoadRunner users, providing proper pacing and timing control.

Moreover, it allows for comprehensive control over user behavior across scripts, such as ramp-up and steady-state phases, which is crucial for conducting incremental load tests and more. This level of control isn't as easily achievable with other tools, but with JMeter and BlazeMeter, it's possible.

Incremental load testing is a type of test you can perform with JMeter. It's a technique that isn't straightforward without BlazeMeter. BlazeMeter facilitates this process.

In our company, various teams use BlazeMeter, particularly appreciating its cloud license software, which supports up to 5,000 users.

BlazeMeter's cloud capabilities allow us to load test or simulate traffic from any location worldwide, such as Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and even specific cities like Delhi. So, with one cloud license, we can simulate user load from various locations globally.

This global simulation capability is a significant advantage of holding a cloud license with BlazeMeter.

We also tried the ShiftLeft testing approach with BlazeMeter.

An area for improvement could be enhancing BlazeMeter's integration with automation scripts.

It would be beneficial if BlazeMeter could support automation frameworks more effectively, including the use of Selenium scripts for both manual and automated load testing.

Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options. A lot of products are coming out, and BlazeMeter pricing is a factor.

For example, LoadStorm by Neustar is integrated with built-in APMs. It won't capture all server stats, but it will collect the minimum important aspects – CPU consumption, utilization rate, and how much a single server is being stressed. If BlazeMeter offered similar functionality, it would be fantastic.

I started using it almost four years ago and continue to use it as needed.

I would rate the stability a six out of ten. It's good. But one suggestion – people tend to rate based on cost these days. Because of that pricing, there are a lot of other new technologies on the market. That's why some people integrate BlazeMeter with an Application Performance Monitor (APM) tool, like Elastic Search or Elastic module. You can pull anything, even CPU utilization or memory usage, by installing agents.

It's actually really good.

BlazeMeter is a scalable product. It's user-friendly and easy to operate, which I find appealing.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

I used Micro Focus LoadRunner. I transitioned from my previous company to a different company. In my previous company, they used LoadRunner for customer projects, with a license for around 500 users.

I've faced a lot of issues with LoadRunner. Even with proper Java configuration, it throws exceptions when I run the first couple of servers. Because of that, I had to use a different VM and install everything from scratch. After that, things worked smoothly with BlazeMeter.

Additionally, I utilize JMeter for several products and Webber out of curiosity.

The setup process for BlazeMeter is simple.

The pricing is manageable. It is not that big. Big companies won't mind the licensing costs. However, Neustar has more reasonable pricing.

Most people don't prefer Neustar, but it is a good solution.

I specialize in load testing, so I use both LoadRunner and BlazeMeter in parallel.

I've previously worked with other tools like Neustar, where we were able to simulate load similarly. A noteworthy aspect of these tools is the ability to integrate automation scripts for load testing, which enhances their utility.

Neustar is actually replacing LoadRunner in our current environment. If we want to do both automation and load testing, I would choose Nustar. We can create Selenium scripts directly in Neustar, and automation engineers can use Selenium to create scripts that can then be called within Neustar.

BlazeMeter meets our needs well. It performs admirably for our purposes.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would recommend using this solution to other users.

As our company wanted to use a cloud solution, we opted for BlazeMeter instead of an on-premises load generator.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to run high loads and generate reports.

Integration with APM tools is an area where the product has certain shortcomings and needs improvement. Integration with APM tools like Dynatrace or AppDynamics needs to be improved.

I have been using BlazeMeter for a year.

It has been stable so far as per our company's user's usage.

It is a scalable solution. My company does not have a high user load to deal with using the product.

Our company has not made many critical errors in getting technical support. Whatever difficulties our company has faced with the tool, we got support from online sources or through raising a ticket. Also, the response from the support team has been good.

I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

I use JMeter.

The product's initial setup phase was user-friendly.

The solution is deployed on the browser.

The solution can be deployed in two to three days.

It is an averagely priced product. One of the reasons my company opted for the tool is because it is an averagely-priced product. Though we do have an APM tool in place, we chose BlazeMeter for cloud testing in our company.

BlazeMeter is the solution my company chose since it is the only tool we found compatible with JMeter. BlazeMeter's help-oriented resources and documentation support JMeter too extensively.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.