4 ms·

Atlassian's cloud-hosted JIRA performed so poorly with even an empty account and empty projects that I thought something had to be wrong the two times we tried

by Legion 10y ago

Atlassian's cloud-hosted JIRA performed so poorly with even an empty account and empty projects that I thought something had to be wrong the two times we tried using it. I imagine it's a problem you can throw resources at when hosting it yourself, but I could not get over how poor the experience was.

Mattasher 10y ago
Same experience. Could not believe how slow it was.
dtemp 10y ago
Cloud-hosted JIRA is missing a lot of features compared to host-yourself JIRA. For one, the cloud version doesn't support LDAP or any other directory schemes for controlling user accounts. That's a big deal for companies who have gotten big enough to start using directory to control access to everything, which is hopefully every company with over 100 employees.
farkas 10y ago
When was this? We've made HUGE improvements to the performance of both JIRA and Confluence online recently.
- tropo 10y ago
  Don't know about him, but for me: Confluence 5.6.3 and JIRA 6.3.6 (with Agile 6.6.11) and Bamboo 5.8.1 on an air-gapped secure network. It's bad. We mostly blame the use of Java. It looks like we're sticking with JIRA for now. Confluence is kind of on the way out. We have numerous wiki servers. The big one, and all the new ones, run MediaWiki. We aren't running around converting. In addition to performance issues, the lack of standard (sorry, but MediaWiki sets the standard) wiki markup syntax hurts badly. The situation for importing a table is laughably awful, with stuff (CSV, tab delimited, space delimited, space padded, etc.) apparently needing to be first imported into a spreadsheet. The lack of category support (as seen on MediaWiki) is pretty much a deal breaker by itself. Instead you force something like a directory structure. Well, MediaWiki categories can be nested, but pages can also go in multiple categories. Confluence lacks that. Bamboo... first of all, OMG the web interface is slow. I'm told that the licensing gets crazy past 10 build boxes. This causes issues with access controls, particularly when air-gapped (disconnected) networks are required. We need multiple instances just for that. Add in the need to build on several different versions of each OS, and it gets really really painful. I think we may be ditching this one, but it's duct taped together well enough for right now.

by Legion 10y ago

Mattasher 10y ago

Same experience. Could not believe how slow it was.

dtemp 10y ago

Cloud-hosted JIRA is missing a lot of features compared to host-yourself JIRA. For one, the cloud version doesn't support LDAP or any other directory schemes for controlling user accounts. That's a big deal for companies who have gotten big enough to start using directory to control access to everything, which is hopefully every company with over 100 employees.

farkas 10y ago

When was this? We've made HUGE improvements to the performance of both JIRA and Confluence online recently.

tropo 10y ago
Don't know about him, but for me: Confluence 5.6.3 and JIRA 6.3.6 (with Agile 6.6.11) and Bamboo 5.8.1 on an air-gapped secure network. It's bad. We mostly blame the use of Java. It looks like we're sticking with JIRA for now. Confluence is kind of on the way out. We have numerous wiki servers. The big one, and all the new ones, run MediaWiki. We aren't running around converting. In addition to performance issues, the lack of standard (sorry, but MediaWiki sets the standard) wiki markup syntax hurts badly. The situation for importing a table is laughably awful, with stuff (CSV, tab delimited, space delimited, space padded, etc.) apparently needing to be first imported into a spreadsheet. The lack of category support (as seen on MediaWiki) is pretty much a deal breaker by itself. Instead you force something like a directory structure. Well, MediaWiki categories can be nested, but pages can also go in multiple categories. Confluence lacks that. Bamboo... first of all, OMG the web interface is slow. I'm told that the licensing gets crazy past 10 build boxes. This causes issues with access controls, particularly when air-gapped (disconnected) networks are required. We need multiple instances just for that. Add in the need to build on several different versions of each OS, and it gets really really painful. I think we may be ditching this one, but it's duct taped together well enough for right now.