Berin Loritsch wrote:
It seems to me that half of the Java world is using JMX for some kind of COP stuff, regardless the fact that they are exposed or not. Seems as they regard JMX differently from what it was designed for.From: Andrzej Jan Taramina [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Hence my inquiry about Avalon and JMX.....since my interest in Avalon (and Avalon 5) stems from my work with embedded systems.
Hopefully others will chime in on how Avalon and JMX can play nicely together....
The Phoenix container uses JMX to control specific components that expose a JMX interface. There are two realities that need to be controlled in CBD (Component Based Design): not all components are controllers, and some components are too small to be exposed like that. The components that are there to control a subsystem, or provide interaction with an administrator, or administrating system (as in your example), are candidates for the components that need to be exposed by JMX. Some components only exist to do work under the control of a master component. Those components really should not be exposed to the administrator.
IT also seems that JBoss makes this assumption... or maybe I'm just wrong. Does it make sene to make this distinction in the interfaces at all?
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
