On Sep 9, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Galder Zamarreno wrote:
Mircea, this is also related to the "Should
CacheManagerJmxRegistration.start() be associated with
CacheManager.start() ?" email thread/
On 07/27/2009 01:18 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
> Yes, JMX should be for reporting only. Not as a registry to obtain a
> component instance.
>
> Operations like starting and stopping a cache should be exposed
> though,
> perhaps via a Cache MBean (by annotating CacheDelegate?)
I've been looking into this and here're some thoughts:
The way I see such start/stop methods working is the following:
1. CacheManager needs to be registered when the CacheManager is
started,
not when the first cache is started, otherwise, how are you gonna
start
the default cache instance via jmx??
+1
2. Currently, when a cache is stopped, it's removed from JMX, so
either:
- You still leave it registered in JMX so that you can start it
afterwards or
- Enable some way for the a Cache to be started via the CacheManager's
JMX API (getCache method name does not suit as JMX method that
starts a
given cache) or
- Both actually. A way to start a brand new, uncreated, cache via
CacheManager and also a way to restart a cache that was previously
started. The latter would be done via Cache.start() but this requires
Cache MBean not to be unregistered upon stop and this only to happen
when the CacheManager is stopped.
So, to summarise:
- Implement my suggested change in ""Should
CacheManagerJmxRegistration.start() be associated with
CacheManager.start() ?" email thread so that DefaultCacheManager is
registered in JMX when the CacheManager is started and not when the
1st
cache is started.
- Add two @ManagedOperation to DefaultCacheManager for
startCache(String) and startCache(). These methods would likely call
DefaultCacheManager's private createCache(String) method and return
void.
- Upon stopping a Cache instance, unregister all MBean except the
CacheDelegate @MBean so that we can start()/stop() the cache from JMX
without any probs.
- Upon stopping the DefaultCacheManager, make sure all CacheDelegate
@MBean instances are unregistered.
Thoughts?
Wouldn't it be simpler to only have one way of starting the cache
(through CM)?
IMO, after the cache is stopped the system should be in the same state
as before starting it: no jmx registered. This would keep things
clearer.
>
>
> On 24 Jul 2009, at 09:55, Galder Zamarreno wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Re:
https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/ISPN-118
>>
>> It turns out that since rev.454, DefaultCacheManager has already
>> been
>> marked as an MBean
>>
(
http://fisheye.jboss.org/browse/Infinispan/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/i...
>> )
>>
>>
>> Currently, none of the getCache() methods are marked as MBean
>> operations
>> and I wanted to get confirmation on whether it should leave as it
>> is. I
>> mean, in AS6, I suppose people will be able to use the JNDI method
>> to
>> get access to the CacheManager and get the cache from there
>> (
http://tinyurl.com/lq688t section 11.2). Anyone running
>> standalone can
>> simply instantiate the cache manager.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> --
>> Galder ZamarreƱo
>> Sr. Software Engineer
>> Infinispan, JBoss Cache
>> _______________________________________________
>> infinispan-dev mailing list
>> infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
>
> --
> Manik Surtani
> manik(a)jboss.org
> Lead, Infinispan
> Lead, JBoss Cache
>
http://www.infinispan.org
>
http://www.jbosscache.org
>
>
>
>
--
Galder ZamarreƱo
Sr. Software Engineer
Infinispan, JBoss Cache
_______________________________________________
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev