-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hehe, there is someone who is intrested in JMX.
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:01:46 +0100
From: Carsten Ziegeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: JMX integration
Giacomo Pati wrote:
I now do have a working implementation for JMX with the least impact (by
added dependencies) to the core (so far only the javax.management
interfaces). The discovery approach is simply looking whether there is a
class which has the MBean suffix to the FQCN of the Component target for
Management. This means you'll have to write your MBeans by hand (yes
there are helper base classes available somewhere else and I will write
about this below). The code I've written checks whether there is a
MBeanServer available in the JVM and only adds JMX discovery support if
there is one (doesn't create an MBeanServer on it's own so far like
Commons-Modeler does).
Awesome. Sounds great. One of my goals for 2.2 was to add JMX support to
Cocoon, but I never really got time for it.
Now I got it but needed some advice concerning the dependencies.
<snip/>
The question I'd like to discuss is whether we wan't add a supporting
package (Commons-Modeler or jetty/mortbay's ModelMBeanImpl) or should we
just stay with the support to add MBeans (how ever those are implemented
is up to the user) to a possibly running MBeanServer in the JVM?
Hmm actually I don't care that much if we add another dependency. I
rewrote the core of Cocoon and added ECM++ for being able to add JMX
Yes, thanks. It was pretty easy to apply the JMX support in 2.2 whereas
in 2.1 it is only possible that one can write JMX aware components under
mentioned circumstances (ThreadSafe and Component).
support somehow. Now, it thing depending on commons-modeler is a little
bit "easier" as it's an Apache project - if there is something wrong for
us we can fix it more easily. But apart from that, I think I just trust
your decision which of the two is better suited for us.
Well, commons-modeler don't has the JMX interfaces and thus
another dependency on mx4j-jmx is needed as that jar is redistributable
(whereas the one from sun is not IIRC).
Comparing jetty's jmx helper calsses to the commons-modeler I see
benefits for jetty's as that package supports MBean arrays whereas
commons-modeler only supports primitive arrays. MBean array would make
it possible to make array components implementing the same interface
(ServiceSelector) directly registrable as MBean (for those which
implements an MBean interface).
So, big +1 for adding JMX support to 2.2 :)
And what about 2.1?
Ciao
Giacomo
- --
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland - http://www.otego.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDqt5SLNdJvZjjVZARAmDlAKCwkx9UB0ZMLfHiBhrjkX4vIKaLJQCgwvAf
dXKE8hqTEu1zTwq5cFlx+58=
=GO76
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
