I still don't understand how jini and jmx can relate. They seem to me to
be unrelated and non-interoperable implementations of to a large extent the
same functionality (as far as finding stuff, not failure recovery in a
distributed environment).
Lets say we do a jini service discovery/lookup with some entry to specify
just what kind of service we need. Well, we get back some way to use that
service through jini. How does this relate to any mbeans?
If we do a jmx query on object names, we can specify all sorts of things
about what kind of mbeans we want. We get back a list of ojbect names,
which we can examine and pick the one we like the most. How does this
relate to jini?
david jencks
Can someone turn on reply to list at sourceforge? this is getting
ridiculous.
On 2001.09.06 10:19:52 -0400 marc fleury wrote:
> |Probably most. It's just levels of flexibility and dependency: either
> |you say the exact service *instances* you need, or you specify the
> |service *types* you need. For most cases the explicit way will probably
> |work well, whereas it is possibly more selfmaintaining to only be
> |dependent on service types.
>
> I see... yes this is what Jini brings to clustering... how do you specify
> the type? by giving a *class* (which would be bad) or giving a class
> *name*?
> sorry I can't remember my Jini book.
>
> marcf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
>
>
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
