Costin Manolache wrote:
Amy Roh wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is there a simple way to disable jmx in tc5 other than changing tomcat code to avoid registration/unregistration manually which won't be trivial.
Just out of curiosity, why would you want to do this ?
I don't. I was just thinking of different options to integrate tomcat into a product that already handles jsr77 code for webmodules. just brain storming...
Hmmm. We could use the "jsr77" option ( that is now in 4.1.x ) and generate
JSR77 names only if it is on.
Or we could just use the other kind of names allways - and have a separate module that re-register the objects with JSR77 names ( if needed ).
But the real issue is that a product shouldn't "handle JSR77 for
webmodules", that's plain wrong. The mbeans for WebModule and Servlet
must be handled by tomcat - who is the one that knows when a servlet or webmodule is instantiated or removed or changes state, and can provide
usefull info ( statistics, etc ).
Yeah, I've already thought about the alternative. It's not very pretty. There can be lots of coordination problems. and it's missing the point.
BTW, how about that servlet unavilable error? Were you able to figure out what's the problem? Didn't see any commits on that.
A product that creates some wrappers or dummy objects with JSR77 names is useless - they'll have no real management value, since you would manage
the wrong components.
The EJB container should handle the JSR77 components that are related with EJBs, and tomcat ( or whatever servlet implementation ) should handle the JSR77 for its components.
( jboss seems to be one case where jsr77 is implemented outside of the servlet container ).
Costin
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
