- 
        1. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAvink May 20, 2009 7:22 AM (in response to vink)Forget to mention one thing, 
 I was running "default" configuration in JBoss 4.2.2
 whereas "all" configuration on JBoss 4.2.3.
 I'm not aware if anything in that configuration can cause this behavior.
- 
        2. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAron_sigal Jul 10, 2009 11:28 PM (in response to vink)Hi Vinay, 
 Have you made any progress with this issue?
 Of course, if you're using the same version of Remoting in both cases, I feel fairly safe in assuming it's not a Remoting problem. Of course, you never know.
 When you say "rmi call", which particular subsystem are you talking about. EJB3, for example, or JBossMessaging?
 -Ron
- 
        3. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAvink Jul 13, 2009 12:24 AM (in response to vink)Hello Ron, 
 I've measured latency of calls going to SLSB in JBoss with "default" & "all" configuration. The difference is terrible.
 I'm not aware what can cause this performance bottleneck in these two configurations so far. (have not invested much time in it, thought I got some reply from your end as I've not designed JBoss.)
 Vinay
- 
        4. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAron_sigal Jul 16, 2009 5:41 PM (in response to vink)Hi Vinay, 
 That's a very interesting finding, and I don't have a clue what could cause the slowdown. Could you start a thread on the EJB 3.0 forum http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewforum&f=221 and see if any one there has some ideas? If you do, could you post on this thread a pointer to the new thread so I can follow it?
 Thanks,
 Ron
- 
        5. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAvink Jul 17, 2009 12:19 AM (in response to vink)Hello Ron, 
 Thanks for the reply.
 I've posted this problem on,
 http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4244207
- 
        6. Re: Performance slowdown on JBoss 4.2.3.GAron_sigal Jul 17, 2009 1:44 PM (in response to vink)Thanks, Vinay. I put a watch on that thread. Hopefully we'll get to the bottom of this issue. 
 
    