Re: Package for JMX integration

[peter royal]

On May 15, 2006, at 1:29 AM, Trustin Lee wrote:

I saw Peter checked in ThreadPoolFilterMBean today. Actually I was thinking

about adding JMX integration classes to
org.apache.mina.integration.jmxpackage.  Would this be a bad idea?

org.apache.mina.integration.jmx ? sounds good.

ThreadPoolFilter f = ...;

// ThreadPoolFilterMBean is not an interface but an implementation of
DynamicMBean (perhaps by extending StandardMBean).

server.registerMBean(new ThreadPoolFilterMBean(f), new ObjectName (...));

I made it a StandardMBean for simplicity.. I'm very open as to what the 'best practices' for doing JMX integration would be.

It is somewhat cumbersome to implement DynamicMBean, but it will give us much more control and users more

description from JMX console.  WDYT?

-pete

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://fotap.org/~osi

What would this look like? We'd provide instances of ModelMBeanInfo that are pre-populated with attributes and operations for MINA types, so users would just have to plug in a reference and expose via their MBeanServer?

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature