--- Andreas Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: > Hi Geeks
>
> If this was already discussed then I feel sorry to
> bother you
> with this again.
>
> Based on the last response of Julian on my "Call for
> Help"
> he said that the Jetty implementation exposes the
> Servets
> as MBeans at the MBeanServer like we do with the
> JBoss
> components. Because I started to create a
> environment to
> manage JBoss from an administrator (not just JBoss
> installer)
>
Servlets/WebApps are wrapped in a container object
that represesnts a JSDK Context, which services and
manages them. Each of these container objects, when a
JMX interface is needed, is represented by a
DynamicMBean which is generated when necessary,
duplicates and publishes the container object's
interface to JMX, and delegates all calls on this
interface to the container.
This implementation allows us the abstraction that we
are talking to the JSDK Context (e.g. /myservlet/*)
via JMX.
This is slighly different from talking to the Servlet
itself.
What we see is an interface designed to manage 1-N
servlets which are registered with the same context.
Not the complete public API of each individual
Servlet.
When Greg (Jetty maintainer) gets back from holiday I
shall ask him whether he has any plans to further
reduce the granularity of his JMX interface so that
each JSDK Context can publish MBean facades for all
the Servlets registered with it. This would lead to
quite a proliferation of MBeans!
In conclusion:
On the downside, this mechanism put's the onus on the
JBoss Service to choose exactly what it wishes to
pulish of it's internals and implement it. On the
upside, the Service may expose more of it's internals
than are immediately relevant to JBoss, giving the
appearance of 'a society of services' rather than one
single API.
Hope that doesn't complicate matters too much !
Jules
> I have these two choices:
> 1) exposing the information by a management
> component
> (as I already started) and the components
> reports the
> deployment etc.
> 2) exposing the deployed components as MBeans
> themselves
> as Jetty is doing so.
>
> The fist solution would need some changes to the
> deployers and
> other classes to report the changes and could only
> be used to
> retrieve informations.
>
> The second solution would increase the numbers of
> MBeans
> dramatically but would allow any JMX management tool
> to
> manage JBoss (the server as well as the served
> components).
>
> I think the second solution would be the better one
> but it would
> need some major changes to the deployers to support
> the
> creation and registration of the MBeans. BUT it
> would need
> some improvements in the JMX Connector to support
> security
> otherwise we expose the whole application. The same
> is through
> for the JMX HTML-Adaptor but this can be secured by
> securing
> the 8082 port through a firewall.
>
> What do you think ? Speak up !
>
> Andy
>
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
