[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JCA on JBoss] - Re: Pooling stress tests failing

[adrian@jboss.org]

"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#4174559

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4174559