Hi!
Rick Horowitz wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Rick Horowitz wrote:
> > > I've been going through the jboss source code to learn the jboss
> > > internals...great stuff! and have come up with some questions and some
> > > things that I suspect may be bugs. I've been collecting these on an Oct
> > > 17 code base, so some of them may have already been addressed. Here's
> > > the list so far...
> > >
> > > 1) Why does initService() in SimpleRealmMappingService and
> > > EJBSecurityManagerService create an instance of SimpleRealmMapping and
> > > EJBSecurityManagerDefaultImpl, respectively, and then create a Reference
> > > object for JNDI naming, rather than just insert these instances into
> > > JNDI?
> >
> > Not sure without looking, but my left-field guess is they are not
> > serializable or remote, and objects in JNDI may be used by clients in
> > different classloaders (such as EJBs in different JARs).
>
> I'm still not clear on the reason for not just binding the objects into
> JNDI directly instead of binding refs? What value do the refs provide?
Binding things into JNDI causes them to be serialized. Which is bad in
this case, and binding a reference avoids that.
In general References give you much more control over how objects are
represented in a JNDI store.
> > On the other hand, once you have run jBoss once successfully, all
> > parameters for all instances that have parameters are written to the
> > jboss.jcml file, so you never really need to look up the name (unless it's
> > that unclear, in which case we should use a better name). Were there
> > specific entries you had trouble identifying?
>
> I didn't really understand the relationships in general between
> jboss.conf and jboss.jcml until I started reading the code. Perhaps I'm
> just being dense...don't know, but it seems to me that the ease-of-use
> goal of jBoss would be well served by somehow (perhaps my suggestion, or
> perhaps some other way) of better tying together the naming of the
> mbeans identified in jboss.conf with the configuration of those mbeans
> in jboss.jcml. just my 2 cents.
Yeah, I'm leaning towards that as well, i.e. to not have any names
hardcoded in the source but to rather allow all names to be set in
jboss.conf. Much more flexible.
To clarify the roles of jboss.conf and jboss.jcml:
jboss.conf is used for initialization of MBeans
jboss.jcml is used for configuration of MBeans
Configurations can change, and can be applied and re-applied during the
lifetime of the server, whereas initialization is a fairly static thing.
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.jboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
