One guess is that the use of a proxy, which is how transporters work, is adding some overhead. In our socket transport versus RMI performance, we used plain org.jboss.remoting.Client invocations. "ravi_eze" wrote : | Now considering jboss RMI with jboss serialization it takes more than 10 times w.r.t. java RMI with java serialization. | Well, that's really bad. I just don't know what's going on. By the way, what role is played by getJavaBytes() and getJavaBytes()? "ravi_eze" wrote : | Also we see Jboss serialization to produce 40% more bytes than java serialization for the above prog. | I have heard that JBossSerialization sometimes uses more space than Java serialization. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4264403#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...