This type of 'magical' configuration will inevitably lead to errors. Why
not insist that deployers modify both jboss.conf and jboss.jcml or better
yet, combine the two into one file?
As for future use of configuration tools... I don't think that it is a good
idea to force the use of a GUI or other configuration tool to setup the
configuration of the server. In many cases, these files will need to be
generated by the users environment (perhaps by ant or make). It seems silly
to me to assume that configuration will be performed in only one fashion.
--jason
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Rickard �berg wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Scot Bellamy wrote:
> > I'll have to go and look at some of the discussions surrounding this. I
> > have two major concerns about this.
> >
> > 1. The stability of the system. Even when the Mbeans that are
> > corrupting the file are fixed, later enhancements can cause the same
> > problem all over again. I worry about the overall stablity of jBoss with
> > such a design/implementation.
> >
> > 2. The ability of system administrators to administor a system where the
> > configuration files are changing dynamically. Simply cycling the server
> > can change its behavior, even if configuration changes are not
> > purposefully changed by the administrator.
> >
> > I realize that I might be talking out of ignorance as many of the
> > discussions regarding jboss.jcml probably occurred before I joined the
> > list a couple of months ago. I will look through the archives and try to
> > better understand the purose of doing it this way.
>
> The basic purpose is to make sure that jboss.jcml mirrors the actual
> settings of all MBeans in the server. This means that if you add MBeans
> to jboss.conf then the initial state of those must be written to
> jboss.jcml. Similarly, if you remove MBeans from jboss.conf those must
> be removed from jboss.jcml. So, it's a synch operation mainly.
> Additionally, we will later change the configuration management so that
> changes to MBeans through a remote administration interface is persisted
> to jboss.jcml so that any such changes survive a server restart.
>
> While I understand that most people currently administer JBoss by
> directly editing jboss.jcml I do not think this will be the common
> practice in the future when the configuration and remote administration
> tools are more developed.
>
> regards,
> Rickard
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
