Hi Tom, Not sure I understand. If you can create a JMX connection to the service's JVM what exactly does River need to do? I'm not sure you need to "supply" anything, or am I misunderstanding you?
Dennis On Nov 12, 2010, at 736AM, Tom Hobbs wrote: > I'm happy to implement using JMX rather than an Admin implementation. > Thanks for the suggestion (I often forget that JMX exists...) > > I'm guessing then that the idea of supplying this kind of data is not > objectionable to you? > > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Sim IJskes - QCG <s...@qcg.nl> wrote: >> On 12-11-10 13:23, Dennis Reedy wrote: >>> >>> Would using the the JSR 160 approach where a service adds >>> net.jini.look.entry.jmx.* attributes to its collection of attributes >>> it maintains with it's service registration also work? That way a JMX >>> connection can be established to the service's JVM, allowing jconsole >>> or visualvm to display (even profile) JVM details? >> >> JMX would be nice. >> >> Gr. Sim >> >> -- >> QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl >> Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 >>
