I've never seen JIRA be "pretty fast", so I can't agree. I also think "2000 different fields" is an unfair exaggeration, if we're going to focus on being fair. The 10 to 20 fields that people might use per issue should not prevent JIRA from being fast with the right architecture.

Same. JIRA is just slow, even in basic configuration. Which is always annoying me because JIRA is 99% read-only. They could generate most of the pages and cache them until anything changes. Even pre-generate then on change. But every time you view an issue, it takes multiple seconds again.

This is a common 'but sometimes' issue in software engineering.

Caching works for 99.9% of cases, 'but sometimes', I click on an issue and it was just updated just before my page rendered.

I've setup Jira (on premise) at my workplace myself. Runs behind an nginx reverse proxy and it is indeed pretty fast!

We don't use much stuff and it's a bit older version 7.8, but I cannot complain so far.

Installed a plain Jira software instance on Docker, that wasn’t terribly slow.

Why shouldn't 2000 fields be fast? Shouldn't all of what jira does boil down to straight forward SQL queries?

or even 200000 etc. I've never used but at a glance i feel like it's just a google sheets tracker with unnecessary visual stuff?

Our fresh install was noticeably slow. Even if it were fast (it's not), they sell the thing as a customizable solution. Few people get everything they need from a vanilla install. That's kinda the whole selling point.

Don’t know about the enterprise version, but the cloud offering loads and renders like molasses.

We have been using jira as a very simple issue tracker with 3 users and the standard backlog, selected for development, done workflow.

Load times are atrocious. It's the slowest website I have ever seen. Maybe facebook is slower, but I don't use that as often.