locust VS Tsung

Finally, let's compare the response time of the requests. For that, we will use Locust , an open source load testing tool. The tests will run for 5 minutes, and will increase 4 requests per second every second until they reach 1000 requests per second. - Source: dev.to / about 2 months ago

Locust: Another open-source tool, Locust is particularly flexible due to its support for Python scripts. It can conduct load tests across multiple machines, making it possible to simulate millions of users simultaneously. An exceptional feature of Locust is its web-based UI, which allows real-time tracking of performance metrics during test execution. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

Locust is a perfect tool to use on such occasion:. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

So, in theory, we can handle 300 requests per minute on a single server which was the assumption we started with. After this, I decided to play with this configuration and see what we could achieve. But, to go ahead I need a system to measure the metrics of our load testing. So I quickly set up Locust on my system. Locust is an open-source easy to setup load-testing framework. - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

The OpenTelemetry Demo is composed of microservices written in different programming languages that talk to each other over gRPC and HTTP; and a load generator which uses Locust to fake user traffic. - Source: dev.to / 6 months ago

Tsung: Developed in Erlang, Tsung is a multi-protocol distributed load testing tool. It can stress a variety of protocols, including HTTP, WebDAV, SOAP, PostgreSQL, MySQL, LDAP, and MQTT, among others. It is capable of simulating a large number of users per server, making it the ideal choice for high-load systems. Tsung also includes a comprehensive performance tracking dashboard and facilitates real-time... - Source: dev.to / 2 months ago

+1 for all the suggestions so far, I've also had good experience with tsung (http://tsung.erlang-projects.org/) and good ole apache bench aka ab. Source: about 3 years ago