This is a dreadful decision. We will look to move away from postman for our use cases, as we can’t justify the cost across the whole team.
Hey @supertester1 , there’s no collection run limits on the Enterprise plan. You may be on the Professional plan instead?
If you’re seeing limitations on the Enterprise plan please reach out to support to get this unblocked: Postman Support | Postman
If my qa group already has collections that they run manually, will they have to change anything in them if I get the Enterprise plan? Do I stage a license file or do I have to create and use postman accounts and and store some stuff in the cloud?
I don’t know how you all do testing, but I expect to do many, many iterations - i.e., “collection runs”.
having to fork over $1,200 a year just to test my own local software?
Bruno is fine and is -actually- free.
This is a horrible and BS change…
Logged in just to join the others that this is a super shitty thing to do. It doesnt use your companies resources! Straight up ransomware. Boycott!
This is the biggest mistake and the worst possible decision by postman.
A reasonable company, would give 5k free runs or max it at x amount of requests in a run.
And then charge like $15 dollars a month for unlimited runs and data storage.
Postman is not listening to the community, and is not doing anything to help the company.
This decision is a loss-loss for Postman.
You will not gain more enterprise customers, and you will lose lower tier ones who would gladly pay you a couple of bucks for mostly local features and fancy buttons. There is no computing resource here by postman, its simply data storage at most.
I suggest open source alternative software: Bruno API Testing or paid: insomnia.rest.
Bye postman, forever.
In the scope architecture and workflow, does this mean that if
we’re using the runner to test and develop our tests on our API running locally,
we are working in a wrong way ?
That would be what I can learn from this kind of move and, above all, the running limit.
What would be the right workflow then (if the local runner cost postman that much)?
It looks like similar restrictions have been placed on the new performance testing feature, but they’re even more restrictive. 25 runs a month… Once the tests are set up I dont think this is a problem, but development of the tests require multiple test runs. Since this is only running on local hardware its another confusing restriction.
It’s unbelievable this “25” magic number. I run 25 runners per hour. My company WANTS to buy. Let me say it AGAIN: my company wants to buy the software. they are ok to PAY. This is not the problem. The problem is WE DONT NEED AN ENTERPRISE LICENSE.
I just ran into this today at my company who pays for a Professional license.
What MRR obsessed exec decided that 250 runs per month for the entire company was a good idea? Or even limits at all for a feature that runs locally off one’s own machine.
Unreal. I don’t think my company was aware of this at all either. I’m letting them know about it and strongly suggesting we move to an alternative immediately. What a terrible decision.
well if the limit is not applicable to newman we can always import collection in postman , make the desired change and run from newman CLI right, yes after every change an export would be needed but still will get the work going on right ? or am i missing something with respect to newman ?
You can use the Postman API, to get the latest saved version of the Collection and run that with Newman.
You wouldn’t need to keep exporting the file each time.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.