Kedar,
I don't know. It's in domain.xml, so I assumed that it should be
manageable, or at least visible (readable) through AMX.
Hong?
Lloyd
On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:18 AM, Kedar Mhaswade wrote:
> Lloyd L Chambers wrote:
>> To clarify: the name of the <engine> need only be unique within its
>> scope (eg the application, web module, etc), because the name of
>> the app forms part of the ObjectName. Even in an EAR, if each web
>> module has <engine> elements, the web module names are unique,
>> therefore the ObjectNames would be unique.
>> The only problem would be if we had more than one <engine> with the
>> same "sniffer" attribute in the same scope.
>> A reasonable assumption?
>
> I am not understanding one thing and hope you have thought this
> through.
>
> Is Engine something that user/developer needs to understand/know?
> I was under the impression that user deals with applications and the
> other machinations are handled transparently. So, I'd think we should
> avoid exposing "Engines" to users unless we absolutely have to.
>
> - Kedar
>
>> lloyd
>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 10:03 AM, Hong Zhang wrote:
>>> Lloyd: thanks for finding a solution for this. The sniffer
>>> attribute is unique at least for the standalone war case, so it
>>> will be ok for TP2.
>>>
>>> Jerome: if we need to have a unique name for the Engine element,
>>> what should it be? I am not yet clear about how the application
>>> element would look like for the ear case where we have multiple
>>> wars inside of ear. Would we have multiple engines with sniffer
>>> value as "web" in that case?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Hong
>>>
>>> Lloyd L Chambers wrote:
>>>
>>>> AMX MBeans look like this for now:
>>>>
>>>> amx:j2eeType=X-EngineConfig,name=security,X-
>>>> ApplicationConfig=hello1
>>>> amx:j2eeType=X-EngineConfig,name=web,X-ApplicationConfig=hello1
>>>>
>>>> The "sniffer" attribute can be used as the unique ID, but I'm not
>>>> sure that it's unique...?
>>>>
>>>> It is preferable to have a name or id.
>>>>
>>>> Lloyd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 20, 2008, at 6:43 PM, Lloyd L Chambers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hong,
>>>>>
>>>>> I see that the <engine> element has no "id" or "name". This
>>>>> causes a headache for MBeans; a unique ObjectName can't be
>>>>> generated that way. All MBeans to date are either singletons
>>>>> within their scope, or have a "name" or "id" or other primary
>>>>> key.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could we please add a name field?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For now I can force the unique id to be the value of "sniffer",
>>>>> but that's a hack.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lloyd
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Lloyd L Chambers
>>>>> lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
>>>>> Sun Microsystems, Inc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Lloyd L Chambers
>>>> lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
>>>> Sun Microsystems, Inc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>>>
>> ---
>> Lloyd L Chambers
>> lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
>> Sun Microsystems, Inc
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: admin-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: admin-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
>
---
Lloyd L Chambers
lloyd.chambers_at_sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc