Which is what all the implementations that I sent out do.  The best one, IMO, 
is this one

http://blogs.sun.com/jmxnetbeans/entry/restful_access_to_jmx_instrumentation

It uses JAX-RS, but he never got around to implementing anything other than 
GET.  Jolokia has all the operations, but it isn't very RESTful as the URI's 
are read/write/etc. Instead of using the same URI and HTTP verbs.

Personally, I would really like to see someone standardize this.  I know 
someone was talking about a proposal to JCP for a RESTful interface JMX a 
couple of years ago, not sure what ever happened to that.

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Benson Margulies [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 2:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: MBeans, get your MBeans

Sergey,

Ian & I are plotting a bigger-than-CXF solution here. Imagine a java
process. it uses the same trick as VisualVM to find all the local
producers of MBeans, consumes them all, and then exports the results
as JSON/Rest. CXF's beans should be just as magic with this as any
others.


On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Sergey Beryozkin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the links. Shipping a JAX-RS resource doing whatever
> mapping we agree upon between MBeans and HTML/JSON/XML seems
> promising. This resource can be deployed as part of the custom
> Application alongside with other root resources, and/or as a
> standalone JAX-RS application, when say JAX-WS endpoints are being
> managed.
> We would not even has to start embedding HTML views into the browser,
> this can be done later. Ultimately we can have many tabs, one for
> logs, one for MBean-based statistics and may be operations, one for
> showing the exchanges recorded with the help of
> PersistIn/OutInterceptors, etc...
> Benson, Ian, can it be of interest to you ?
>
> Cheers, Sergey
>
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Jason Chaffee <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Here is another one.
>>
>> http://www.jolokia.org/
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jason Chaffee [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Wed 2/9/2011 2:48 PM
>> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
>> Subject: RE: MBeans, get your MBeans
>>
>> There are several people working on REST for JMX.  See the links below.
>>
>> http://blogs.sun.com/jmxnetbeans/entry/restful_access_to_jmx_instrumentation
>>
>> http://esme.apache.org/jmx-rest-api.html
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/polarrose-jmx-rest-bridge/
>>
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1571600/is-there-any-jmx-rest-bridge-available
>>
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Wed 2/9/2011 1:58 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: MBeans, get your MBeans
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Ian Helmke <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Basically what this boils down to is that we'd like to generate some
>>> MBeans to define our management interface, and create a web front-end
>>> for them - that way we have a nice interface for ourselves but we also
>>> allow for others to use whatever MBeans management interface they want
>>> (which is ideal if they're using something else already to manage
>>> other MBean-managed java software). The issue is that the MBeans API
>>> seems primarily reflective and from what I've been able to glean from
>>> reading up on it, it would take an equal or lesser amount of work to
>>> create a generic JSON -> MBean interface and a web front-end that way
>>> vs. crafting a custom, software-specific solution.
>>>
>>> One could imagine running a small java/JAX-RS program locally on any
>>> machine with MBeans to monitor which exposes some kind of JSON ->
>>> MBean API, which a web front-end could then query and present
>>> interesting information from.
>>>
>>
>> What do you think about shipping a JAX-RS resource with say
>> @Path("/manage") in the rt/management-web ?
>> This resource can be deployed as a JAX-RS endpoint, in-process with
>> the CXF server and will be configured with the address(es) or ids of
>> jaxws/jaxrs endpoints. Internally it will connect to endpoint-specific
>> MBeans ?
>>
>> cheers, Sergey
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Ian is now prepared to correct my slightly warped presentation of our
>>>> motivation, as soon as I send this for him to reply to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> The MBean client API is kind of a pain in the neck. Talking RMI to
>>>>> contact MBean servers on multiple machines is a really big pain in the
>>>>> neck.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you were sitting down to create a webapp to visualize some
>>>>> management data, you would perhaps rather write that code in terms of
>>>>> a JSON-ish data model of the data. than in terms of the MBean API.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, our thought was to solve both problems: get rid of the RMI
>>>>> business by having a service on each machine that exposed the data via
>>>>> JAX-RS, and be able to code to a less annoying data model.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of my colleagues is likely to post some more specific thoughts
>>>>> about what he hates about the MBean API.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to