|The question at the moment is, why do you need to create an object name |per invocation? Is it possible to cache the object names by mapping them |to *real* identifies as opposed to this property nonsense? (how many
That is what I do today, with the EJB layer. This means however that we pass the hashcode back and forth from the proxy. The future of your JMX juha/trevor/adrian is the bill idea for dynamic clients. And as you know Juha under discussion in the spec. I want you to see how powerful this is. Give me an MBean, give me a client stack, a JNDI name and you have a client. BETTER YET, the Bill dynamic invocation client, where the client builds the invocation and passes that to the Invoker() and HE MUST PUT THE OBjectName in it. Do you see that? he can't guess the name hashing and the mapping we do. Your implementation being a pig precludes that. And I am sorry but having the superserver real in a year's time in all of the worlds infrastructure will supercede "spec sillyness", even when that spec comes from France (are you there?). So one solution is to expose, as we do today but generalized to MBeans, a scheme by which you pass us a identifier that maps to the right ObjectName on the server. The only construct that makes sense is the String itself, and then there is no order bullshit and if you fuck up the name tough for you my friend, I am not going to care. 2 solutions. 1- I build a mapper that takes String and returns ObjectName 2- you build a ObjectName implementation that caches the ObjectName and returns the right Object if you pass me exactly the same String. Come to think of it we probably need the first one. Can you expose it at the JMX level? I believe the registry idea must be present at the JMX level, then you would put the objectname mapped to the String name and that is fast enough for me to use and STANDARDIZE on inside the server. Bar that, the spirit dies for a spec quirk |MBean's do you imagine having in your server, could you create the object |names for them on the server side and lookup the same instances from a |"cache" -- I know it sounds ass backwards but given then future plans on |JMX it would be best to avoid too much reliance on the JMX classes |themselves. correct that is what I understand we need that "cache". It is the Registry idea with more generic mappings. It is a system level Registry juha. In a invoker I want to pass the String and use that to map to the ObjectName on the server or maybe expose an invoke that doesn't work with ObjectNames? something that makes sense. Keep exceptions out of the design. marcf ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "I will not watch my people die while you discuss this invasion in a commitee" -- some silly queen in a SF movie-- ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
