db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Korneliussen <Andreas.Kornelius...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Choice of JMX implementations
Date Thu, 13 Jul 2006 19:43:52 GMT
Sanket Sharma wrote:
> Just wanted an opinion about JMX implementation to use for Derby. I
> have listed the better known implementations below with my comments:
>     1. Sun JDK 1.5 and above: Comes prepackaged with JMX. Requires no
> additional Jars to depolyed with the client. Leads to smaller
> footprint. One the negetive side, it will always require Derby to run
> on JRE 1.5 and above. May not be a good choice as some implementations
> might be using old JVM versions. For Sun JDK/JVM prior to version 1.5
> Sun's references implemenation is available as a seperate jar
> download. Applications running on JVM 1.3 and 1.4 will need to
> download install this jar.
>      2. XMOJO Project:  This JMX supports JDK version 1.2 and above,
> which means it imposes no additional JDK requirements. Hoewever,
> additional JARs will to be deployed on the client for them to use JMX.
> They can either be bundled with Derby or can be seperately installed
> on client. Another point to note is that XMojo itself requires more
> jars to be present (xalan.jar, crimson.jar, and jaxp.jar and
> org.mortbay.jetty.jar). It supports construction of MBeans through
> Metadata sepcified in a XML file. Utility methods convert this
> metadata in ModelMBeanInfo which can then be used to construct a
> ModelMBean.
>      3. Apache Commons Modeller framework:  The commons modelling
> framework is another Apache project developed under the Jarkarta
> project. Although, it is not an implementation in itself, it
> facilitates writing of MBeans by using XML files. The Metadata for
> MBeans is specified in an XML file which is parsed to gernerate
> MBeans.It is known to work with all major JMX implementations.
>      4. MX4J: Another very popular JMX framework know to work with JDK
> 1.3 and above. It also supports automatic generation of ModelMBeans
> using XDoclets. Needs additional jars to be deployed. Supports HTTP
> adapters for access via HTTP.

I think that the RI of JMX also has HttpAdaptor.

>     My recommendation is to use either XMOJO or MX4J. Both of them are
> open source and support JDK 1.3 and above, which is what Derby is
> supported on.
> Comments and opinion will be appriciated.
Is it necessary to choose a specific JMX implementation ? Aren't these 
just implementations of the same JCP spec, so the interfaces/classes 
should be compatible ?

I might recommend using the reference implementation during the 
development of this feature, because then you may avoid being dependent 
on specific add-on features from a specific library. Or is there a 
specific feature you really would like to use, which is not available in 
the RI ?

XMOJO is distributed under LGPL, could that be a problem ?

-- Andreas

> Best Regards,
> Sanket Sharma

View raw message