geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nanduri, Amarnath" <Amar.Nand...@AgilQuest.com>
Subject RE: Central piece: to JMX or not to JMX
Date Thu, 07 Aug 2003 20:22:30 GMT
I agree....

Cheers,
Amar..

Amarnath Nanduri
AgilQuest Corp.
(ph) 804 745 0467 xt 127
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Blewitt [mailto:Alex.Blewitt@bandlem.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 7:36 AM
To: Christian Trutz
Cc: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Central piece: to JMX or not to JMX

> I think a central piece of an
> J2EE implementation should be the
> EJB container and that should be the
> first think to concentrate.

I don't believe that a J2EE server should be the /central/ piece, 
though it should obviously be a main piece.

One approach would be to configure various services with JMX, which 
leads to the question: should components be built on top of JMX, or 
should an interface be provided to control via JMX? My preference would 
be (initially) for the latter; although projects like JBoss are built 
on top of JMX I'm not sure it's necessary (or even desirable) to depend 
on JMX directly. (ApacheJ2EE hasA JMX interface, not ApacheJ2EE isA JMX 
interface).

I think a micro-kernel architecture for setting up the server and 
configuring the various pieces is probably a good idea though, and that 
should be the central piece. The other components can then sit on top 
of that:

+ GeronimoKernel
|-- GeronimoJNDIService
|-- GeronimoEJBContainer
|-- GeronimoWebContainer (maybe an interface to plug in Tomcat etc)
|-- GeronimoSecurityService

and so on.

Alex.

al

Mime
View raw message