Hi Willem, Yes I removed the eventing mechanism for registering instrumented objects as I think it is redundant and not necessary. I am not sure I understand your question regarding disabling/enabling instrumented objects. Currently you can be enabled/disabled instrumentation via configuration at startup time. A user cannot selectively decide which components need managing. They either get all or none, although I am looking into adding instrumentation dynamically during runtime. As for the use of AOP, I am not sure that it is necessary. The amount of code required to register an instrumented object is fairly minimal at this point, so AOP may be overkill. Perhaps you could give more detatils regarding what you see as a better way using AOP. Regards, Seumas
-----Original Message----- From: Willem Jiang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 3:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Review of patch for CXF-427 [JMX] Hi Seumas, I just came back from vacation, I am sorry for reply your mail late. I went through the patch about the JMX infrastructure. I found you remove the CXF event which used by InstrumentationManager for handle the components' creation and destruction. You also take the WorkQueue as an example for the instrumentation. Here are two questions about them. 1. How can I configure the JMX infrastructure to enable or disable center kind of CXF components' instrumentation without change the CXF code ? My suggestion is we can use AOP to add the component register code dynamically, it would be easy to implement this. 2. About the getObjectName(), if there are two WorkQueue in the same bus, the two WorkQueue's ObjectName will be same. May be we need to take some other parameter to build up the ObjectName. Cheers, Willem. Soltysik, Seumas wrote: >I just uploaded a patch file for Jira CXF-427 which involves a refactoring of >the current JMX infrastructure. Could someone take a look at this patch and >apply it if deemed sufficient. >Thanks, >Seumas > > >
