[jboss-dev-forums] [Design of JBossCache] - Re: Channel creation - mux vs. old style

[bstansberry@jboss.com]

"manik.surtani at jboss.com" wrote : 
  | Looking at JBCACHE-1023, and with reference to this, how would we deal with potentially injecting both a ChannelFactory as wel as a Channel?
  | 
  | If the Channel is null, fall back to the ChannelFactory and use the CF to create a channel? And if the CF is null, create a new JChannel with cluster props (or default cluster props?) 

+1.  That's the intuitively understandable way.

anonymous wrote : 
  | A bit of a PITA that org.jgroups.jmx.JChannelFactoryMBean doesn't extend org.jgroups.ChannelFactory - as this would be the cleanest interface to use here.

I think the type in RuntimeConfig should be org.jgroups.ChannelFactory. I see now that AS 5 will have no problem instantiating a ChannelFactory, injecting it into a RuntimeConfig and also injecting it into an instance of org.jgroups.jmx.JChannelFactory.  It can then register the org.jgroups.jmx.JChannelFactory in JMX in order to expose the management interfaces.

Key thing in the above is JMX is just a mechanism for exposing management interfaces.  It doesn't and shouldn't play the service integration role it did in AS 4-style architectures.  Service integration should be done by injecting pojos -- i.e. the plain org.jgroups.ChannelFactory.


View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4041871#4041871

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4041871