On Dec 8, 4:51 pm, iamthat <[email protected]> wrote: > 1. We ran some performance tests with simple Java objects (approx 2 KB > size) with the above setup and we notice that Whalin 1.3.2 is > performing better than other client variants. This is contrary to our > original expectation that later version of Whalin and Spy offer better > performance comparing to Whalin 1.3.2. Any one else on the same boat? > Or can some one explain if this is indeed what we should expect?
There's no way to know why you're seeing what you're seeing without knowing what you did. You're very likely doing something incorrect with the APIs.
