--- Juha-P Lindfors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2001, Julian Gosnell wrote:
> > AFAIK, the advantage of Dynamic MBeans is that
> they
> > are not statically constrained by inheritance and
> may
> > vary their interfaces dynamically at run time.
> >
> > Both of these demonstrate the inadequacy of simply
> > checking the inheritance of a potential Service
> MBean
>
> Actually I don't believe this to be true. Dynamic
> MBeans can determine
> their management interface at runtime, for example
> by reading an XML
> file. This allows the management interface to be
> changed without
> recompiling. But they should not vary the interface
> during their life
OK - I agree - my mistaken assumption. The way they
are coded leaves a gap which MAY be exploited to do
this, however the JMX spec states DynamicMBeans SHOULD
not do so.
> time. A management application can expect the
> management interface to stay
> the same during the life time of the MBean, once it
> has retrieved it from the
> agent. The agent is not required to enforce this
> static interface, so it
> is possible to build dynamic mbeans that do vary
> their interfaces but this
> can only be done with proprietary management
> applications. Compliant JMX
> applications can't be expected to work.
>
> So I still think checking for the Service interface
> is good enough for
> solving the Jetty integration problem. For fancier
> life cycle management,
> I think Stacy already has the base work done (via
> xmlets) and that is a
> very interesting work, but not required for this
> particular problem at
> hand :)
>
I still think that it should be up to a DynamicMBean
at runtime whether or not it wishes to be managed by
ControlService (otherwise what is the point of being a
DynamicMBean?).
If you simply look at it's inheritance you constrain
this decision to compile time.
If you configure it in a file you constrain it to
deploy-time.
What is more complicated, less efficient or wrong
about making the decision at run-time ?
I think I'll rest my case here and wait to see what
actually gets implemented.
I look forward to seeing my JettyMBeans working
harmoniously with JBossMBeans.
Thanks everyone for all the input. I hope we didn't
consume to much bandwidth.
Catch you all later,
Jules
> -- Juha
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
