db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John H. Embretsen (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-3429) Remove system property derby.system.jmx
Date Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:29:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3429?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12570998#action_12570998

John H. Embretsen commented on DERBY-3429:

If we remove this system property and enable Derby JMX management by default, then the only
recommended way for a user (admin) to allow JMX management of his application embedding Derby,
but not Derby itself, is to use a security manager, correct?

This means that if the user (admin) is not willing to use a security manager to limit JMX
exposure, he must accept that valid JMX users may see and access Derby's MBeans. I don't see
how this is much different from today, when a valid JMX user (client) may enable Derby's ManagementMBean
programmatically even if the system property has not been set. This will in turn enable all
relevant Derby MBeans. 

So, I think this is an acceptable approach.

An alternative approach is to reverse the default value of the property, so that a user has
to set it (to false) if he does not want to enable Derby's MBeans by default. 
Then, for example, JConsole users won't see MBeans related to Derby by default. It would still
be possible to enable Derby's MBeans at runtime, using the ManagementMBean, so the usefulness
of such a knob may be limited (it won't stop dedicated (and valid) JMX users from enabling
the MBeans).

At the moment I don't know of any other use cases supporting the need to enable Derby-JMX
with a static knob.

> Remove system property derby.system.jmx
> ---------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-3429
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3429
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
>            Priority: Minor
> I don't believe that derby.system.jmx provides any benefit and is counter to the concept
of using JMX for management.
> The one use case for it from DERBY-1387 is:
> Making the Derby JMX automatically available in the MBean server will make it impossible
for the user to make some application with an embedded Derby db manageable thorugh JMX without
also making Derby manageable thorugh JMX. I would think that this "all or nothing" granularity
could be a problem for some applications. So we would need an explicit derby.system.jmx property
for enabling the management service anyway.
> The functional spec contains no information as to why this is a useful feature.
> I wanted to separate out the discussion from the wider issues in DERBY-1387

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message