cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianugo Rabellino <gian...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JMX integration (was: Re: [RT][long] Cocoon 3.0: the necessary mutation)
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 22:24:22 GMT
On 12/5/05, Giacomo Pati <giacomo@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 12/5/05, Giacomo Pati <giacomo@apache.org> 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 component pool sizes come to my
> >> mind quickly).
> >>
> >> Is there any interest do discuss this topic for a possible
> >> implementation?
> >
> > Most definitely yes. However, be warned that retrofitting JMX to the
> > current Cocoon architecture seemed like a big headache to me. Maybe
> > going through Excalibur instrumentation (which I've never been able to
> > see working) could do, otherwise expect pain. Lots of.
>
> Could you elaborate a bit more? I'm interested about oppiions.

If my memory serves me correctly (and don't count on it!) I remember
skimming through a JMX book with growing pain and anger: basically
what I recall is that it's trivially easy to write from scratch code
"the JMX way", but when it comes to retrofitting (no more vanilla
MBeans, you basically have to resort to Model MBeans) I seem to recall
a long and outstanding pain in terms of required code to be written in
terms of descriptos, not to mention a long sleeve of what seemed to me
reflection based bug-prone hacks. But don't trust my FUD: go and read
it yourself, I just gave it a cursory look at it, which left me with a
sore feeling.

Ciao,

--
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. -  http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance: http://www.orixo.com
(blogging at http://www.rabellino.it/blog/)

Mime
View raw message