Hi Chris, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Lenz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Cactus Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 4:08 PM Subject: Re: Patch for JBoss starting too slow
[snip] > I agree, and actually I thought it was doing that already ;-) > > So this also makes it unnecessary to expose the wait times, as discussed before? I guess so. At least it works fine for me. > > > I also attach a patch (not necessarily the best approach :) ). > > The patch looks good, and I'll commit it. Thanks! Great! > > > Thanks, > > Florin > > > > P.S. Seems that the JMX bean that I posted earlier (last week) was not > > considered a good approach by anyone. Some feedback would have been nice, > > though. I hope this one _will_ get some kind of answer (any, including "quit > > bugging us"). > > I've read your message and had a quick glimpse at the javadocs, but haven't > had the time to look in more detail, which would be necessary to give any > kind of half-intelligent feedback :-P Now I know who was bothering to look at them (I was kind of monitoring the accesses) :) Actually after I took a deeper look at the Cactus-integration sources I see that hot-deployment is not provisioned for in the current architecture, so my bean is not that useful for Cactus. I myself am currently pre-deploying (with JMX wait) before launching the <cactus...> task. It works well (with JBoss pre-started) and IMO there's no reason for doing any changes. Maybe I jumped the gun a little when suggesting the inclusion of JMX wait. Now I realize that not all containers may support hot-deploy and that's not Cactus's concern anyway since pre-deployment is possible. > > Don't give up yet! Won't, thanks. Florin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
