"jesper.pedersen" wrote : The TxConnectionManagerStressTestCase is new -- committed together with the fix for JBAS-5095. | | I have used both the BaseConnectionManagerStressTestCase (Non-TX) and TxConnectionManagerStressTestCase during the development - of course with a full run of org.jboss.test.jca.test.* before committing. | | #881 was the first run on Hudson with TxConnectionManagerStressTestCase - if #882 also fails I'll increase the timeout value. | One failure is enough, increase it now. How is somebody supposed to know whether they broke something if there are spurious failures? anonymous wrote : | The TxConnectionManager based stress testcases shows a small increase in CPU time due to the synchronization on wasFreed() on my machine compared to the old implementation, but it's a very small increase. Points of contention are caused by waits not cpu utilization (unless the cpu is maxed out). I'm suprised you can even measure the cpu utilization of a single synchronization unless you're deliberately stressing it and it is doing a lot of "spin locking" View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4174559#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...