Performance and scale testing
With every Jira release, we’re publishing a performance and scaling report that compares performance of the current Jira version with the previous one. The report also contains results of how various data dimensions (number of custom fields, issues, projects, and so on) affect Jira, so you can check which of these data dimensions should be limited to have best results when scaling Jira.
This report is for Jira 9.2. If you’re looking for other reports, select your version at the top-right.
When some Jira administrators think about how to scale Jira, they often focus on the number of issues a single Jira instance can hold. However, the number of issues is not the only factor that determines the scale of a Jira instance. To understand how a large instance may perform, you need to consider multiple factors.
This page explains how Jira performs across different versions and configurations. So whether you are a new Jira evaluator that wants to understand how Jira can scale to your growing needs or you're a seasoned Jira administrator that is interested in taking Jira to the next level, this page is here to help.
There are two main approaches, which can be used in combination to scale Jira across your entire organization:
- Scale a single Jira instance.
- Use Jira Data Center which provides Jira clustering.
Here we'll explore techniques to get the most out of Jira that are common to both approaches. For additional information on Jira Data Center and how it can improve performance under concurrent load, please refer to our Jira Data Center page.
Determining the scale of a single Jira instance
There are multiple factors that may affect Jira's performance in your organization. These factors fall into the following categories (in no particular order):
- Data size
- The number of issues, comments, and attachments.
- The number of projects.
- The number of Jira project attributes, such as custom fields, issue types, and schemes.
- The number of users registered in Jira and groups.
- The number of boards, and the number of issues on the board (when you're using Jira Software).
- Usage patterns
- The number of users concurrently using Jira.
- The number of concurrent operations.
- The volume of email notifications.
- The number of plugins (some of which may have their own memory requirements).
- The number of workflow step executions (such as Transitions and Post Functions).
- The number of jobs and scheduled services.
- Deployment environment
- Jira version used.
- The server Jira runs on.
- The database used and connectivity to the database.
- The operating system, including its file system.
- JVM configuration.
This page will show how the speed of Jira can be influenced by the size and characteristics of data stored in the database.
Jira 9.2 performance
Jira 9.2 was not focused solely on performance, however we do aim to provide the same, if not better, performance with each release. In this section, we'll compare Jira 9.2.0 to Jira 9.1.1. We ran the same extensive test scenario for both Jira versions. The only difference between the scenarios was the Jira version.
The following chart presents mean response times of individual actions performed in Jira. To check the details of these actions and the Jira instance they were performed in, see Testing methodology.
Response times for Jira actions
Jira 9.2.0 vs Jira 9.1.1
The following sections detail the testing environment, including hardware specification, and methodology we used in our performance tests.
Before we started the test, we needed to determine what size and shape of data set represents a typical large Jira instance.
In order to achieve that, we used our Analytics data to form a picture of our customers' environments and what difficulties they face when scaling Jira in a large organization.
The following table presents rounded values of the 999th permille of each data dimension. We used these values to generate a sample dataset with random test data in Jira Data Generator.
Baseline Jira data set
|Jira data dimension||Value|
We chose a mix of actions that would represent a sample of the most common user actions. An "action" in this context is a complete user operation like opening of an Issue in the browser window. The following table details the actions that we included in the scenario for our testing persona, indicating how many times an action is performed in a single test run, where a full set of performance tests involves multiple test runs.
|Action name||Description||Number of actions per test run|
|View Dashboard||Opening the Dashboard page.||10|
|Create Issue||Submitting a Create Issue dialog.||5|
|View Issue||Opening an individual issue in a separate browser window.||55|
|Edit Issue||Editing an issue, submitting the changes, and waiting until they appear in the issue.||5|
|Add Comment||Adding a comment, and waiting until it appears in the issue.||2|
|Search with JQL|
Performing a search query using JQL in the Issue Navigator interface.
The following JQL queries were used...
|View Board||Opening of Agile Board||10|
|Browse Projects||Opening of the list of Projects (available under Projects > View All Projects menu)||5|
|Browse Boards||Opening of the list of Agile Boards (available under Agile > Manage Boards menu)||2|
|Project Summary||Opening the Project Summary page and waiting for the metadata column to appear||5|
|View Backlog||Opening the Backlog page||10|
|All Actions||A weighted arithmetic mean of all actions performed during a single test run. The weight of each data point corresponds to the request count per action per test run.||-|
The performance tests were all run on a set of EC2 instances, deployed in the
eu-central-1 region. For each test, the entire environment was reset and rebuilt, and then each test started with some idle cycles to warm up instance caches. Below, you can check the details of the environments used for Jira Server and Jira Data Center, as well as the specifications of the EC2 instances.
To run the tests, we used 20 scripted browsers and measured the time taken to perform the actions. Each browser was scripted to perform a random action from a predefined list of actions and immediately move on to the next action (ie. zero think time). Please note that it resulted in each browser performing substantially more tasks than would be possible by a real user and you should not equate the number of browsers to represent the number of real-world concurrent users.
Each test was run for 20 minutes, after which statistics were collected.
|Jira Server||Jira Data Center|
The environment with Jira Server consisted of:
The environment with Jira Data Center consisted of:
Jira Server: 1 node
Jira Data Center: 2 nodes
|CPU cores:||Java options:|
|CPU:||Operating system: |
Jira Data Center:
|EC2 type:||Operating system:|
|CPU cores:||Automation script:|
Jira 9.2.0 scalability
Jira's flexibility causes tremendous diversity in our customer's configurations. Analytics data shows that nearly every customer dataset displays a unique characteristic. Different Jira instances grow in different proportions of each data dimension. Frequently, a few dimensions become significantly bigger than the others. In one case, the issue count may grow rapidly, while the project count remains constant. In another case, the custom field count may be huge, while the issue count is small.
Many organizations have their own unique processes and needs. Jira's ability to support these various use cases explains the dataset diversity. However, each data dimension can influence Jira's speed. This influence is often not constant nor linear.
In order to provide individual Jira instance users with an optimum experience and avoid performance degradation, it is important to understand how specific Jira data dimensions influence the speed of the application. In this section we will present the results of the Jira 9.2.0 scalability tests that investigated the relative impact of various configuration values.
How we tested
- As a reference for the test we used a Jira 9.2.0 instance with the baseline test data set specified in "Testing methodology" and ran the full performance test cycle on it.
- To focus on data dimensions and their effect on performance, we didn't test individual actions, but instead used a mean of all actions from the performance tests.
- Next, in the baseline data set we doubled each attribute and ran independent performance tests for each doubled value (i.e. we ran the test with a doubled number of issues, or doubled number of custom fields) while leaving all the other attributes in the baseline data set unchanged.
- Then, we compared the response times from the doubled data set test cycles with the reference results. With this approach we could isolate and observe how the growing size of individual Jira configuration items affects the speed of an (already large) Jira instance.
Response times for Jira data sets
Jira 9.2.0 vs Jira 9.1.1
Performance of Advanced Roadmaps in Jira Data Center
Factors that affect Advanced Roadmaps performance
The biggest variable on the performance of Advanced Roadmaps in your Jira Data Center instance is simply the amount of information it contains. A plan in Advanced Roadmaps is made up of several different Jira functions, and each one must be individually executed when creating a plan. The more functions your plan executes, the longer it takes to load.
The speed of Advanced Roadmaps in your instance depends on:
- The number of issues in your instance
- The number of issue links and dependencies in your instance
- The number of issues in each plan
- See the Limits on plan size section in Plans in Advanced Roadmaps
- The number of issue sources your plans have and the complexity of their JQL
- The configuration of your hierarchy
- Any custom fields that you have enabled and use in your plans
- The number of versions and releases in your plans
How we tested
We used the Jira Performance Testing framework, including the hardware and methodology outlined in the Testing methodology section of this page.
Our test instance has:
- 1 million issues
- 100k users
Our test plan has:
- 500 issues
- 5 issue board issue sources
- 5 teams (1 per issue source)
- 5 level issue hierarchy
- 80 releases/versions
- 0 plan custom fields
Summary metrics for Advanced Roadmaps in Jira Data Center 9.2.0
This version of Advanced Roadmaps included in Jira Data Center 9.2.0 produced the following load times, based on the criteria outlined above:
Plans using the Improved (3.x) interface:
|Advanced Roadmaps in Jira 9.2.0||Advanced Roadmaps in Jira 9.1.1|
|Initial load time||2983||3102|
|Plan backlog load time||1075||1099|
|Plan total load time||4063||4204|
All times in ms.
Plans using the Legacy (2.x Live Plans) interface:
|Advanced Roadmaps in Jira 9.2.0||Advanced Roadmaps in Jira 9.1.1|
|Initial load time||2434||2553|
|Plan backlog load time||2595||2506|
|Plan total load time||5036||5066|
|Details view load time||710||702|
|Plan calculation time||4917||4963|
All times in ms.
The number of issues affects Jira's performance, so you might want to archive issues that are no longer needed. You may also come to conclusion that the massive number of issues clutters the view in Jira, and therefore you still may wish to archive the outdated issues from your instance. See Archiving projects.
As your Jira user base grows you may want to take a look at the following:
- Connecting Jira to your Directory for authentication, user and group management.
- Connecting to Crowd or Another Jira Server for User Management.
- Allowing Other Applications to Connect to Jira for User Management.
Jira Knowledge Base
For detailed guidelines on specific performance-related topics refer to the Troubleshoot performance issues in Jira server article in the Jira Knowledge Base.
Jira Enterprise Services
For help with scaling Jira in your organization directly from experienced Atlassians, reach out to our Premier Support and Technical Account Management services.
The Atlassian Experts in your local area can also help you scale Jira in your own environment.
Was this helpful?Yes Provide feedback about this article