You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@karaf.apache.org by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> on 2019/11/20 06:49:52 UTC
[DISCUSS] JMX Default Context
Hi guys,
I'm working on adding JMXMP connector on Karaf JMX layer (in addition of
the RMI connector we already have).
I was thinking about the default JMX context we are using.
Right now, our context contains the Karaf instance name. For users, it
means they have to use service URL like
service:jmx:rmi:///jndi/rmi://localhost:1099/karaf-foo
It's not very convenient/predictable: for instance, in jconsole, the
users have to use the full service URL.
Of course, they can change the URL to use /jmxrmi in
etc/org.apache.karaf.management.cfg but it's not the default.
I propose to either:
1. Use /jmxrmi context instead of /karaf-${karaf.name}
2. Keep the default /karaf-${karaf.name} context and add an "alias" on
/jmxrmi
Thoughts ?
Regards
JB
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [DISCUSS] JMX Default Context
Posted by Francois Papon <fr...@openobject.fr>.
Hi,
Agree with Romain, karaf name instance is not necessary because each
instance have its own port.
regards,
François
fpapon@apache.org
Le 20/11/2019 à 08:00, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit :
> Hi
>
> Since each instance will get its own port the name is pointless IMO until
> all instances are shown in the same jmx tree but here the name would be a
> jmx properties so +1 to not have the name in the url (probably with a
> comment in the cfg to get back current behavior for users relying on it).
>
>
> Le mer. 20 nov. 2019 à 07:52, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
>> Hello
>>
>> IMO, alias would be better. But how about child containers?
>> (instance:create)?
>>
>> regards
>> Grzegorz Grzybek
>>
>> śr., 20 lis 2019 o 07:50 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> napisał(a):
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I'm working on adding JMXMP connector on Karaf JMX layer (in addition of
>>> the RMI connector we already have).
>>>
>>> I was thinking about the default JMX context we are using.
>>>
>>> Right now, our context contains the Karaf instance name. For users, it
>>> means they have to use service URL like
>>> service:jmx:rmi:///jndi/rmi://localhost:1099/karaf-foo
>>>
>>> It's not very convenient/predictable: for instance, in jconsole, the
>>> users have to use the full service URL.
>>> Of course, they can change the URL to use /jmxrmi in
>>> etc/org.apache.karaf.management.cfg but it's not the default.
>>>
>>> I propose to either:
>>> 1. Use /jmxrmi context instead of /karaf-${karaf.name}
>>> 2. Keep the default /karaf-${karaf.name} context and add an "alias" on
>>> /jmxrmi
>>>
>>> Thoughts ?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] JMX Default Context
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Since each instance will get its own port the name is pointless IMO until
all instances are shown in the same jmx tree but here the name would be a
jmx properties so +1 to not have the name in the url (probably with a
comment in the cfg to get back current behavior for users relying on it).
Le mer. 20 nov. 2019 à 07:52, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr...@gmail.com> a
écrit :
> Hello
>
> IMO, alias would be better. But how about child containers?
> (instance:create)?
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> śr., 20 lis 2019 o 07:50 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> napisał(a):
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I'm working on adding JMXMP connector on Karaf JMX layer (in addition of
> > the RMI connector we already have).
> >
> > I was thinking about the default JMX context we are using.
> >
> > Right now, our context contains the Karaf instance name. For users, it
> > means they have to use service URL like
> > service:jmx:rmi:///jndi/rmi://localhost:1099/karaf-foo
> >
> > It's not very convenient/predictable: for instance, in jconsole, the
> > users have to use the full service URL.
> > Of course, they can change the URL to use /jmxrmi in
> > etc/org.apache.karaf.management.cfg but it's not the default.
> >
> > I propose to either:
> > 1. Use /jmxrmi context instead of /karaf-${karaf.name}
> > 2. Keep the default /karaf-${karaf.name} context and add an "alias" on
> > /jmxrmi
> >
> > Thoughts ?
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> > --
> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> > jbonofre@apache.org
> > http://blog.nanthrax.net
> > Talend - http://www.talend.com
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] JMX Default Context
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Child instances have dedicated port number, so it's not a problem.
Regards
JB
On 20/11/2019 07:52, Grzegorz Grzybek wrote:
> Hello
>
> IMO, alias would be better. But how about child containers?
> (instance:create)?
>
> regards
> Grzegorz Grzybek
>
> śr., 20 lis 2019 o 07:50 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> napisał(a):
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I'm working on adding JMXMP connector on Karaf JMX layer (in addition of
>> the RMI connector we already have).
>>
>> I was thinking about the default JMX context we are using.
>>
>> Right now, our context contains the Karaf instance name. For users, it
>> means they have to use service URL like
>> service:jmx:rmi:///jndi/rmi://localhost:1099/karaf-foo
>>
>> It's not very convenient/predictable: for instance, in jconsole, the
>> users have to use the full service URL.
>> Of course, they can change the URL to use /jmxrmi in
>> etc/org.apache.karaf.management.cfg but it's not the default.
>>
>> I propose to either:
>> 1. Use /jmxrmi context instead of /karaf-${karaf.name}
>> 2. Keep the default /karaf-${karaf.name} context and add an "alias" on
>> /jmxrmi
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: [DISCUSS] JMX Default Context
Posted by Grzegorz Grzybek <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hello
IMO, alias would be better. But how about child containers?
(instance:create)?
regards
Grzegorz Grzybek
śr., 20 lis 2019 o 07:50 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> napisał(a):
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm working on adding JMXMP connector on Karaf JMX layer (in addition of
> the RMI connector we already have).
>
> I was thinking about the default JMX context we are using.
>
> Right now, our context contains the Karaf instance name. For users, it
> means they have to use service URL like
> service:jmx:rmi:///jndi/rmi://localhost:1099/karaf-foo
>
> It's not very convenient/predictable: for instance, in jconsole, the
> users have to use the full service URL.
> Of course, they can change the URL to use /jmxrmi in
> etc/org.apache.karaf.management.cfg but it's not the default.
>
> I propose to either:
> 1. Use /jmxrmi context instead of /karaf-${karaf.name}
> 2. Keep the default /karaf-${karaf.name} context and add an "alias" on
> /jmxrmi
>
> Thoughts ?
>
> Regards
> JB
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>