Giacomo Pati wrote:
Before I'm going to commit the real MBean I have I'd like to discuss
whether we want to have a cocoon.sh/cocoon.bat option to start a jetty
with a JMX-Agent activated.
My oppinion would be: Yes we should
+1 also!
If most people find this is a must I'd further want to
Giacomo Pati wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I forgot to mention the discovery process for JMX support in the core.
The CoreServiceManager (the JMXUtils helper class) tries to find a
JMX-Agent by calling the method
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 24 Dec 2005, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Hmm... so IIUC if we want to add the MBean to the core, that would add a
dependency on Jetty for its helper classes. Can we extract these classes in a
separate jar (having the full Jetty as a core
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Comparing jetty's jmx helper calsses to the commons-modeler I see
benefits for jetty's as that package supports MBean arrays whereas
commons-modeler only supports primitive arrays. MBean array would make
it possible to make array components implementing the same
Giacomo Pati wrote:
So, big +1 for adding JMX support to 2.2 :)
So long as the new dependency isn't one for the core, but can be
contained in a block.
No, this is why I'm seeking for suggestions. JMX support has to be
implemented in the core (CoreComponentManager IIRC) and thus will
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Giacomo Pati wrote:
So, big +1 for adding JMX support to 2.2 :)
So long as the new dependency isn't one for the core, but can be
contained in a block.
No, this is why I'm seeking for suggestions. JMX support has to be
implemented in the core (CoreComponentManager
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:16:51 +0100
From: Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Comparing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:19:39 +0100
From: Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration
Giacomo Pati wrote:
So, big +1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:50:28 +0100
From: Reinhard Poetz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Giacomo Pati
Giacomo Pati wrote:
I do have lots of single lines of code for JMX support ;-).
even better ;-)
--
Reinhard Pötz Independent Consultant, Trainer (IT)-Coach
{Software Engineering, Open Source, Web Applications, Apache Cocoon}
web(log):
Giacomo Pati wrote:
Yes. The implementaion I have now checks whether the Container (i.e.
Servlet Engine) has launched a JMX-Agent (MBeanServer) to activate JMX
support at all. So this is the dependency on the JMX interfaces which
obviously will be needed at runtime as well (I probably don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I've committed initial support for JMX in the CoreServiceManager
and ComponentInfo classes (and a helper classes as well as).
Next step would be how the MBean ObjectNames should be computed. Those
names are normally used to narrow a JMX Consoles
Le 23 déc. 05, à 17:43, Giacomo Pati a écrit :
...Before I'm going to commit the real MBean I have I'd like to
discuss whether we want to have a cocoon.sh/cocoon.bat option to start
a jetty with a JMX-Agent activated.
My oppinion would be: Yes we should..
+1, this is useful if only to show
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I forgot to mention the discovery process for JMX support in the core.
The CoreServiceManager (the JMXUtils helper class) tries to find a
JMX-Agent by calling the method
javax.management.MBeanServerFactory.findMBeanServer(null) which returns
a
On Dec 23, 2005, at 8:43 AM, Giacomo Pati wrote:
Before I'm going to commit the real MBean I have I'd like to discuss
whether we want to have a cocoon.sh/cocoon.bat option to start a jetty
with a JMX-Agent activated.
My oppinion would be: Yes we should
+1. I agree, cocoon.sh is useful
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hehe, there is someone who is intrested in JMX.
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:01:46 +0100
From: Carsten Ziegeler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Upayavira wrote:
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 16:00:41 -0800
From: Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Giacomo Pati wrote:
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Giacomo Pati wrote:
So, big +1 for adding JMX support to 2.2 :)
So long as the new dependency isn't one for the core, but can be
contained in a block.
No, this is why I'm seeking for suggestions. JMX support has to be
Giacomo Pati wrote:
I now do have a working implementation for JMX with the least impact (by
added dependencies) to the core (so far only the javax.management
interfaces). The discovery approach is simply looking whether there is a
class which has the MBean suffix to the FQCN of the
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Giacomo Pati wrote:
I now do have a working implementation for JMX with the least impact (by
added dependencies) to the core (so far only the javax.management
interfaces). The discovery approach is simply looking whether there is a
class which has the MBean suffix to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 18:04:49 +0100
From: Gianugo Rabellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration (was: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Date: Sun, 04 Dec 2005 11:48:37 +0100
From: Sylvain Wallez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0: the necessary mutation
Gianugo
On 12/5/05, Giacomo Pati [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we are at it. I actually have the need for some JMX
instrumentation in Cocoon 2.1. But instead of just writing some MBean
wrappers for my components, I'd like to spent some more time on it for a
more general solution to it (monitoring
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 18:04:49 +0100
From: Gianugo Rabellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration (was: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0
On 12/5/05, Giacomo Pati [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/5/05, Giacomo Pati [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we are at it. I actually have the need for some JMX
instrumentation in Cocoon 2.1. But instead of just writing some MBean
wrappers for my components, I'd like to spent some more time
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 23:24:22 +0100
From: Gianugo Rabellino [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: JMX integration (was: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0
26 matches
Mail list logo
