IMHO, no.
Jean-Louis
2011/11/16 Carlo de Wolf <cdewolf_at_redhat.com>
> Does it make sense to also have this SLSB?
>
> Carlo
>
> On 11/16/2011 01:48 PM, abien (JIRA) wrote:
>
>> Automatic Registration Of @Singleton EJBs As MXBeans
>> ------------------------------**----------------------
>>
>> Key: EJB_SPEC-32
>> URL: http://java.net/jira/browse/**EJB_SPEC-32<http://java.net/jira/browse/EJB_SPEC-32>
>> Project: ejb-spec
>> Issue Type: New Feature
>> Affects Versions: 3.2
>> Reporter: abien
>>
>>
>> @Singleton EJBs are perfect MXBeans: http://www.adam-bien.com/**
>> roller/abien/entry/singleton_**the_simplest_possible_jmx<http://www.adam-bien.com/roller/abien/entry/singleton_the_simplest_possible_jmx>
>>
>> The registration of @Singleton in JMX runtime, however, requires a bit of
>> plumbing.
>>
>> Proposal:
>>
>> Auto-registration of all EJB-methods of a @Singleton bean with the
>> @MXBean annotation:
>>
>> 1. All accessors should result in attributes (getters in read-only and
>> getters / setters in writable attributes)
>> 2. public EJB methods should be exposed as JMX-operations
>> 3. A MXBean interface should be optional (it could be auto-generated by
>> the EJB-container)
>> 4. The MBean name should be derived from the class.getName() and the type
>> from the class
>>
>>
>