Our mechanism is mostly a pluggable reader if I understand you
correctly. This is somewhat in a bit of flux at the moment but the
best place to start is the model project. There is an SDO
implementation currently which can be extended to allow for new
component types. I also have a fairly large patch that will need to
be applied once the repo is up which has the start of a POJO-based
mechanism (presumably some type of parser could generate the POJO
graph) and contains some significant refactoring of the code.
We have some documentation in the xdocs directory that is fairly
accurate on how the model is converted into a runtime representation
(builders and runtime configurations). The basic idea is we build an
object graph of the logical model (derived from SCDL) and then walk
it, decorating the graph with factories which can produce runtime
artifacts (contexts which manage component instances). This way, we
can "precompute" as much as possible at load time and make various
optimizations (e.g. avoiding proxies for references that do not need
them).
As soon as the repo is in place, I will merge my patch. In the
meantime, have a look at the model project and docs. Feel free to
post questions once they come up.
Jim
On Jan 3, 2006, at 6:34 AM, Trieloff, Carl wrote:
Thanks,
One of the things I want to look at is how the dynamics of the
config would
work, as this will be key to the integration of Celtix with
Tuscany. Are
you planning to provide some dynamic mechanism here or plug-able
config reader
for the Model Assembly?
Carl.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Boynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 10:25 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SCA and mbeans
Trieloff, Carl wrote:
How does SCA integrate with JMX/ and deal with dynamic
configuration? Does it define a model
or is it up to the implementer?
To my knowledge this is an area the spec has not yet addressed
although
a common management model would seem to be a good idea (not just
for JMX
but also WS-DM or SNMP). There is an API for the static model metadata
through the ModuleContext but IMO it still needs some spec work.
In Tuscany we currently have the static model of the configuration (in
the model module) and the intent is to instrument the runtime
components
for a more dynamic model (e.g. service throughput). I don't think we
would create a hard dependency on JMX (e.g. by extending MBean
classes)
but would use a bridge between the runtime and the MBeanServer.
--
Jeremy
