At 10:30 PM 6/13/01 +0200, Leo Simons wrote: >Conceptually, the MBeanServer is there to expose a management interface >to humans / console apps / cronjobs / init scripts / whatever. the JMX >impl(s) are written to support this.
JMX is seen as a hammer by some - and thus everything must be a nail ;) For instance the jBoss project uses it as a kernel of sorts to load and deploy their components (ie you load dependency MBean which in turn loads all other MBeans). >The ComponentManager needs to be speedy, JMX isn't (doesn't have to be). It really depends on use case. As the CM is only usually accessed at startup of component I don't think the speed hit would be that big an obstacle. >I think that what should be exposed for management (by phoenix) are >ServerApplications. Finer graining is inappropriate here. And of course, >life cycle management for those could be handled with a MBeanServer >(something we've talked about but have yet to decide on). For phoenix, it would be insane to use jmx for CM - agreed ;) However if you were building distributed component based systems - it could be useful. Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------* --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
