Umm, yeah. Ignore my last post, I'm an idiot. :)
I forgot implements ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapperMBean in my subclass, so naturally
JMX exposed the CacheJmxWrapperMBean instead. Duh!
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4065422#4065422
Reply to the post
"k-dub" wrote : So, I tried writing a ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapperMBean with just
getters, along with a ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapper class which subclassed
CacheJmxWrapper. I was very surprised to see JMX use the CacheJmxWrapperMBean
interface rather than my ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapperMBean.
That seems stran
So, I tried writing a ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapperMBean with just getters, along
with a ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapper class which subclassed CacheJmxWrapper. I was
very surprised to see JMX use the CacheJmxWrapperMBean interface rather than my
ReadOnlyCacheJmxWrapperMBean.
So I basically had to write out
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : Is your concern that the CacheJmxWrapperMBean
interface has too much? If you post an MBean interface you want, I can look
into creating a limited super-interface that you could expose. No promises
though.
Our concern is that people could change the cache configuratio
You'd have to write your own class to handle the JMX registration. You can see
what CacheJmxWrapper does; you basically need a CacheSPI (to get the
interceptors), an MBeanServer, and some algorithm for creating the ObjectNames
for the interceptors.
Is your concern that the CacheJmxWrapperMBean
Oops, I forgot: This is 2.0.0 CR3 on Sun JDK 1.6.0_02 in a stand-alone app
compiled to 1.5 target VM. We're trying to use Spring for configuration, rather
than programmatic configuration.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4063198#4063198
Reply to
