I think this starting to get too cute as there can be different semantics as to whether bind or rebind is allowed to overwrite existing entries, whether missing subcontexts should be created or represent an error, whether a live reference or a serializable object should be bound, etc. to me, management of JNDI is an internal operation of the mbean.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Jencks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "jboss-dev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 7:13 PM Subject: [JBoss-dev] How to integrate jndi and jmx with ModelMBeans > There's been some discussion of finding things in jndi and in jmx via > obejct name queries, and we currently have quite a few mbeans that end up > binding themselves or an object they control into jndi. > > I think we can provide a generic way of dealing with this situation using > the interceptor stack based model mbean implemention the jbossmx guys are > building. > > We put an interceptor in the mbean stack that looks at the object name, and > if it has a key - value pair JndiName=blabla/bla, when start goes by asks > the object implementing the mbean behavior for the object to bind in jndi > and binds it, and when stop goes by unbinds it. If there is no > "getJndiObject" method, it would bind the object itself. We could use > descriptors to indicate if the object should be bound in serialized form, > using an object factory, or both*. > > Another similar interceptor could be used to bind LocalHomes, although this > seems less clean and more special purpose. > > I think this would mean we'd only need one ObjectFactory implementation > server-wide. > > > Anyway, I'm not sure if this is an overly cute application of aspects or a > really good idea, but I thought I'd mention it. Any comments? > > Thanks > david jencks > > * explanation of the "both": For ejb proxies, this "both" choice would > provide "no deserialization" for local access and "no serialization" for > remote access. Right now local lookups of a home interface (as opposed to a > localhome interface) deserializes a proxy. If we bound the proxy using an > object factory, remote calls would each require serialization of the looked > up object. We should bind both a serialized version for remote access and > using an ObjectFactory for local access. > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
