hello,
> I had already planned on making the attributes persist.
>
> But not in a way that would be acceptable for generic JBoss uses (I
> suppose).
>
> I was going to add a MBeanConfigEJB (CMP bean), that basically had 3
> fields.
...
> For clustering, I would post a JMS message for each change,
On 2001.11.30 13:11:43 -0500 David Budworth wrote:
> First off, thanks David J. for adding the test case.
glad you caught the problem.
>
> Anyway,
>
> For my own project, I have made a base Dynamic MBean for my own code
> that all my MBeans are based on.
>
> Mainly to avoid the whole MyClass.j
I was wondering about RequiredModelMBean. Why is it called "Required"?
Just so the JMX agent creators know it must be implemented? It seems
kinda weird that they would force the prefix "Required".
-David
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Trevor Squires wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, marc fleury wrote:
>
, we
will work on this next week I think.
marcf
|-Original Message-
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
|Trevor Squires
|Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 4:24 PM
|To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Service MBeans questions
|
|
|On Fri, 30 Nov 2001
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, marc fleury wrote:
> On the point of MBean not being declared, we are moving to the "dynamic
> mbean" route, well in fact the ModelMBean and since juha is almost done with
Interesting about the ModelMBean direction. I recently spent some time
trying to use RequierdModelMBea
re it?
> > where are your files? how do you persist them? do you persist changes? do
> > you cluster them easily? that is part of what we are trying with the
> > mmbeans... post snippets if you can
> >
> > marcf
> >
> > |-Original Message-
> &
y? that is part of what we are trying with the
> mmbeans... post snippets if you can
>
> marcf
>
> |-Original Message-
> |From: marc fleury [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> |Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 1:34 PM
> |To: David Budworth; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |Subject: R
PROTECTED]
|Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] Service MBeans questions
|
|
|funny you mention, I am actually looking at this right this minute.
|
|The state stuff as part of the serviceMBean was defined by Rickard.
|
|It makes total sense. It is going to be part of the JSR77 spec the
|state stuff is. I know the
funny you mention, I am actually looking at this right this minute.
The state stuff as part of the serviceMBean was defined by Rickard.
It makes total sense. It is going to be part of the JSR77 spec the state
stuff is. I know the Iona guy and myself pushed for the adoption of the
state stuff, j
