Sure, that makes some sense. There are few issues that need to be addressed with the deployment logic and I plan on looking into next week.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Scott Stark Chief Technology Officer JBoss Group, LLC xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Neuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] Why does one MBean failure cause the entire deployment unit to fail? > Perhaps it makes sense to have a way to mark an MBean > as "essential" or "optional", and treat failures of > the latter as loggable, non-fatal errors. > > Dave Neuer > > --- Scott M Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a good feature for exactly the case you > > mention, jboss-service.xml > > being screwed up. Why put the mbeans together if you > > don't want this > > behavior? > > > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Scott Stark > > Chief Technology Officer > > JBoss Group, LLC > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Jason Dillon > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 12:05 PM > > Subject: [JBoss-dev] Why does one MBean failure > > cause the entire deployment unit to fail? > > > > > > Just what the subject says: Why does one MBean > > failure cause the entire deployment unit to fail? > > > > > > > > If I have put several MBeans into user-service.xml > > (or whatever) of which the last one fails to start, > > why do we stop/destroy all of the others? This also > > happens from time to time with jboss-service.xml, > > say of Naming can't start because of a port conflict > > (perhaps because the jvm did not die when it was > > asked to). When this does happen the server will > > shutdown and exit. > > > > > > > > I can see how this might be useful to force users > > to deal with problems with the deployment unit, but > > I think that logging an ERROR is a better option, > > only failing the deployment unit if none of the > > MBeans have deployed, or rather throw the exception > > but don't stop/destroy/unregistered beans which have > > been started. > > > > > > > > This behavior is more desirable in my opinion, as > > it allows for easier debugging by allowing the user > > to inspect the logs, and the state of the other > > MBeans to possibly resolve the issue, possibly by > > changing config and starting by hand. With the > > system as is, the only options are to comment the > > config, or configure/create each MBean by hand. both > > kinda suck, the latter much more. > > > > > > > > Is there a reason to fail all MBeans when one > > MBean fails? > > > > > > > > --jason > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________________________ > > Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference > August 25-28 in Las Vegas - http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas - http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
