cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Diephouse" <...@envoisolutions.com>
Subject Re: Managing (JMX) Configuration/Policy Beans
Date Fri, 26 Jan 2007 20:08:16 GMT
If the impl has the @ManagedResource annotation for Spring, isn't it
probably also going to be managed by Spring? In which case its kind of a
non-issue.

On 1/26/07, Daniel Kulp <daniel.kulp@iona.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Friday 26 January 2007 14:00, Dan Diephouse wrote:
> > If we go this route, do we still need the annotations in cxf-common? The
> > only references to them that I see are on the work manager. Anyone know
> > about this code?
>
> Well, if I'm instrumenting some endpoint code or something, I'd MUCH
> rather
> use JDK5 annotations than a spring bean file.   However, since spring
> provides some annotations, I'd say just use those and ditch ours.    The
> only "trick" will be to get non spring-defined objects wired into the
> spring
> JMX server.   Example, if I call:
>
> Endpoint.publish(url, impl);
> and the impl has the spring ManagedResource annotations on it, should our
> runtime automatically register it, or should we provide a "hook" (like
> bus.get(ManagementServer.class).register(name, impl)) for users to be able
> to
> add objects?
>
> Dan
>
> >
> > - Dan
> >
> > On 1/26/07, Soltysik, Seumas <Seumas.Soltysik@iona.com> wrote:
> > > Good point. Using Spring to define the JMX interface definitely is
> easier
> > > and makes more sense.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dan Diephouse [mailto:dan@envoisolutions.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 12:56 PM
> > > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Managing (JMX) Configuration/Policy Beans
> > >
> > >
> > > Is this information we really want to keep in our schemas? Spring
> > > provides an approach where you can control the MBean interface through
> > > the MBeanInfoAssembler
> > > interface. There are multiple implementations including one where we
> can
> > > just specify what methods should be exposed as attributes in the
> > > spring.xml:
> > >
> > > http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.0.x/reference/jmx.html
> > >
> > >
> http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.0.x/reference/jmx.html#jm
> > >x-interface
> > >
> > > - Dan
> > >
> > > On 1/26/07, Soltysik, Seumas <Seumas.Soltysik@iona.com> wrote:
> > > > It seems like it would be a good idea to be able to modify certain
> > >
> > > runtime
> > >
> > > > attributes associated with the config/policy Spring Beans via JMX.
> > > > Since only certain attributes make sense to modify at runtime, only
> > > > these
> > >
> > > certain
> > >
> > > > attributes should be exposed via an MBean. Could we integrate the
> > > > information regarding which attributes should be exposed by
> annotating
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > > existing schemas for the policies and then modifying the JAXB code
> > >
> > > generator
> > >
> > > > to add JMX annotations to the appropriate getter/setter methods?
> This
> > >
> > > way we
> > >
> > > > can ensure that only certain appropriate values can be changed via
> JMX.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Dan Diephouse
> > > Envoi Solutions
> > > http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog
>
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
>



-- 
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message