You might want to consider jmx-ifying by using model mbeans, since they allow you to instrument an existing class without changing it and without implementing an additional interface, and allow you to specify a rather informative interface. Personally I like the jboss xmbean even though it is not well tested. This is a model mbean implementation that relies on an xml document to describe the management interface.
Using xdoclet you have these choices already: 1. Standard mbeans: generate the xxxMBean.java interface based on @jmx.managed-attribute and @jmx.managed-operation tags. This is very easy. There's also a subtask to generate skeleton jboss configuration files, which might not be interesting to non-jboss users. 2. XMBean xml descriptor generation based on the above + much much more (descriptions, descriptors, also specification of managed-constructors and notifications) 3. A descriptor class generator for mx4j. This appears to me to tie you to mx4j, but I have not looked into it much: it might be a descriptor for an alternate model mbean implementation. Note that model mbean implementations are supposed to be portable across jmx servers, although I don't know that this has been used or tested much. I also wrote something (jbossXmlDoc subtask) that will generate xml docbook documentation for an mbean using the same info as goes into the xmbean descriptor. I recommend simply turning all the important components into mbeans directly and exposing their interesting attributes and operations rather than writing an additional management layer, however opinions may differ on the advisability of this. Thanks david jencks On 2002.06.29 18:37:10 -0400 Glen Daniels wrote: > > +1 > > We'd talked about JMX management from the beginning days of Axis, just > never really got it in. I'd love to see the server, the transport > listeners, and the individual services get exposed via JMX.... we should > talk about APIs and such for this (and how easy/hard it'll be, and who > wants to write the code (hint hint:))) after beta-3. > > --Glen > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 1:53 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Axis and JMX ? > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 9:55 AM > > Subject: Axis and JMX ? > > > > > > > > > > Is there any plan to add JMX support in Axis ? Both configuration > > > and to extract status information and statistics. > > > > it would be nice, would it not? > > > > The AxisServletBase class I have just added has a load > > counter that logs > > system load; that is the kind of thing that jmx should get at. > > > > > You may know that - but there are 2 'utils' that allow you to > > > transparently add JMX, without modifying a single line of code. > > > One is the modeler ( that use an xml file to describe the attributes > > > and classes ) and the other one is in tomcat utils, and uses > > > introspection to expose all public getters/setters with supported > > > types. > > > > Also there is the <jmxdoclet> stuff in XDoclet to generate the > > descriptors/interface classes from metadata tags in the > > files. That would > > seem a better approach to me. > > > > I am sure if you want to add MX4J support, nobody will stop > > you, as long as > > it doesnt impact the rest of development. > > > > > > > >
