June 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of Management Features on JBoss] - Re: How to Expose MBean Invocation Stats into admin-console?

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

I created a JBossMan.2.1.1.Beta2 version under JBMAN for an updated release. I'll do a new release this afternoon if you don't get to it. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234746#4234746 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234746

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Management Features on JBoss] - Re: How to Expose MBean Invocation Stats into admin-console?

by emuckenhuber

Hmm using the componentName as default seems to make more sense than attachment.class.name. I committed a patch to the default managedObject populator to set the hasDefaultName to false, when having a @ManagementObjectID. This was also causing some regressions in our tests. Although i haven't done a new jboss-mean release yet. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234742#4234742 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234742

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Moving microcontainer -> kernel

by david.lloyd＠jboss.com

Parameter names do have meaning in that they tell the human reading the code what the parameter is. If you called all your parameters "x" and "y" you'd soon have an angry mob outside your door - or at least, people wouldn't use your hard-to-use software. If "bean" is the class name, how about "beanName" and "beanClassName"? There's nothing wrong with being descriptive. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234740#4234740 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234740

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of OSGi Integration] - aQute maven repository

by adrian＠jboss.org

Why does the OSGi build depend upon a maven repository that might disappear in future? All the JBoss builds should be based upon artifacts from the jboss repository, otherwise the builds could become unreproducable in future. http://viewvc.jboss.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/jbossas/projects/jboss-osgi/tr... | <repository> | <id>aQute</id> | <url>http://www.aQute.biz/repo</url> | <snapshots> | <enabled>false</enabled> | </snapshots> | </repository> | View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234739#4234739 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234739

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Moving microcontainer -> kernel

by adrian＠jboss.org

"david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : | | | public static BeanMetaDataBuilder createBuilder(String name, String bean) | | | | This just makes no sense. One of those parameters is the name of the bean associated with the BeanMetaData, the other is the name of the class. But which is which? I get it wrong about half the time. | This must be a bad example? The javadoc tells you which is which. If you posted all the code; | /** | | * Create builder from name and bean. | | * | | * @param name bean name | | * @param bean bean class name | | * @return new Builder | | */ | | public static BeanMetaDataBuilder createBuilder(String name, String bean) | | { | | return BeanMetaDataBuilderFactory.createBuilder(name, bean); | | } | | Parameter names have no meaning in java anyway - it being a positional language - so they could be called x and y. This is "Humpty dumpty" again. "bean" is actually the name of the class on BeanMetaData because you can't have a get/setClass() - it already means something else in java.lang.Object. Anyway, "String bean" is kind of funny, even if it wasn't an intentional joke by Ales. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_beans View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234730#4234730 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234730

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Moving microcontainer -> kernel

by david.lloyd＠jboss.com

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : "david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : OK, I may not agree that this is "right" but it is what it is. I think there's one thing we can agree on though - the parameter ought to have a more accurate name, like "beanName" or "beanIdentifier" rather than just "bean", because "bean" implies an expectation that you're passing in the actual bean object in question rather than its identifier. | | You simply don't get it. | I get it - as I said, it is what it is. I'm just saying that at the least we ought to change the parameter name because it's misleading. For example, BeanMetaDataBuilder gives us: | public static BeanMetaDataBuilder createBuilder(String name, String bean) | This just makes no sense. One of those parameters is the name of the bean associated with the BeanMetaData, the other is the name of the class. But which is which? I get it wrong about half the time. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234726#4234726 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234726

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossXB] - Re: Marshalling an AbstractKernelDeployment

by alex.loubyansky＠jboss.com

Yes, marshalling has to be re-written. A few hacks can be added to make some basic cases work. But MC metadata uses quite sophisticated binding tricks. Unmarshalling is way ahead of marshalling in terms of binding power. Current marshalling is based on binding with XsdBinder and uses different (and more primitive compared to unmarshalling) binding metadata. So, basically, it has to be re-written. But if we want to be able to marshal MC metadata or any other metadata with XB we have no choice. I can start working on it if we decide this is what we want to do. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234715#4234715 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234715

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Moving microcontainer -> kernel

by adrian＠jboss.org

"david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : OK, I may not agree that this is "right" but it is what it is. I think there's one thing we can agree on though - the parameter ought to have a more accurate name, like "beanName" or "beanIdentifier" rather than just "bean", because "bean" implies an expectation that you're passing in the actual bean object in question rather than its identifier. You simply don't get it. The controller context, dependencies, etc. has nothing to do with a "bean" or the choices of any particular component model. The POJO controller context is only one possible implementation that relates to beans and that happens to use a String as the name. Other component models don't have to use a String for the name. Its up to each component model to keep things consistent. If you want the longer version of this argument, at least as it relates to JMX, then use search. I know I've been over the issue at least once before at some length in this forum. There's even a JIRA (or at least a discussion) somewhere about using a "UUID" as the real id with the publically visible "name" just being an alias. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234706#4234706 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234706

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Management Features on JBoss] - Re: How to Expose MBean Invocation Stats into admin-console?

by ALRubinger

"ALRubinger" wrote : I'll drop this in AS Branch_5_x. r89640 (jboss-man) and r89648 (EJB3 and Build changes). The metrics are now exposed as ManagedObjects as part of the Branch_5_x default build. S, ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234602#4234602 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234602

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Management Features on JBoss] - Re: How to Expose MBean Invocation Stats into admin-console?

by ALRubinger

"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : I just released a jboss-managed 2.1.1.Beta1 version with the JBMAN-84 change that was in the snapshot./quote] | | I'll drop this in AS Branch_5_x. | | S, | ALR View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4234596#4234596 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4234596

15 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums June 2009