"bstansberry(a)jboss.com" wrote : | "scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : | | ServiceBindingManager has to be replaced with a component that integrates with the profile service to use the management view. We have talked about having managment view properties support annotation so that they can be identified as ports, interfaces. With that, it should be easy to replace this. | | | | Not sure if the bit about annotating management view properties is needed (at least for a first version). The service names and relevant properties can be identified in a -bindings.xml file. | | If so, I'm thinking in terms of following the same architecture as the current SBM, where a microcontainer ControllerContextAction calls the SBM as part of bean configuration, passing the service name and the management view. The SBM at start has parsed a -bindings.xml and created a bunch of ServiceBinding objects. One the call from the ControllerContextAction, it looks up the ServiceBinding for the service name, finds a delegate, tells the delegate to apply the bindings. | | We'd need new versions of the 3 existing delegate classes that do much the same thing, but instead of updating mbean properties, they invoke setters on the management view. | | We'd also have to have proper management views for all the services involved in SBM: | | jboss:service=Naming | jboss:service=WebService | jboss:service=invoker,type=jrmp | jboss:service=invoker,type=pooled | jboss:service=HAJNDI | jboss:service=invoker,type=jrmpha | jboss:service=invoker,type=pooledha | jboss:service=CorbaORB | jboss.jmx:type=Connector,name=RMI | jboss.jmx:name=SnmpAgent,service=trapd,type=logger | jboss.jmx:name=SnmpAgent,service=trapd,type=adaptor | jboss:service=invoker,type=http | jboss:service=invoker,type=http,target=Naming | jboss:service=invoker,type=http,target=Naming,readonly=true | jboss:service=invoker,type=httpHA | jboss:service=invoker,type=http,target=HAJNDI | jboss.ws:service=ServiceEndpointManager | jboss.remoting:service=JMXConnectorServer,protocol=rmi | jboss.remoting:type=Connector,name=DefaultEjb3Connector,handler=ejb3 | jboss.remoting:service=Connector,transport=socket | jboss.web:service=WebServer | | Might be able to reduce that if we can keep the existing ability to use the mbean interface as the management view and update it via setting JMX attributes. | And Scott's response: "scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : | A first pass implementation could simply have a mapping from the metadata class/property that is being bound and a deployer would update replace the component metadata before the component deployer runs. Both mbeans and mcbeans are in use for ports/interfaces now. I would think that should be easier than integrating with mc controller contexts. | | Providing a management interface for a binding manager and exposes the available ports/interfaces is what I was talking about in the forum. How that should be done stil needs some more thought. We should be providing a management interface that applies to whatever the initial implementation is and migrate that to the final implementation so that its relatively stable for users as it evolves. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4166763#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...