Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Jess Holle
Costin Manolache wrote: Jess Holle wrote: In general the same-user, same-machine stuff works great (including with Tomcat 5) if you specify -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote as part of the command line. Again - remember not everyone is using Sun JDK1.5 implementation. My understanding is Macs don

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Costin Manolache
Jess Holle wrote: In general the same-user, same-machine stuff works great (including with Tomcat 5) if you specify -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote as part of the command line. Again - remember not everyone is using Sun JDK1.5 implementation. My understanding is Macs don't have 1.5 yet, neither

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Jess Holle
Remy Maucherat wrote: For those interested in not wasting their time the way I just did, I just found this: http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/management/agent.html *Limitation*: On Windows, for security reasons, local monitoring and management is only supported if your default Windows

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Jess Holle
In general the same-user, same-machine stuff works great (including with Tomcat 5) if you specify -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote as part of the command line. This is without any special web app or such. What I really want to see is a nice bit of code that allows you to fire up a JMX RMI conne

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Remy Maucherat
Remy Maucherat wrote: Dominik Drzewiecki wrote: I couldn't get the attach to process thing to work, though (= without a port). Is it supposed to be doable ? Neither have I (I am talking of tomcat running as Windows service). It seems that both processes : tomcat JVM and jconsole JVM have to be

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Remy Maucherat
Dominik Drzewiecki wrote: I couldn't get the attach to process thing to work, though (= without a port). Is it supposed to be doable ? Neither have I (I am talking of tomcat running as Windows service). It seems that both processes : tomcat JVM and jconsole JVM have to be owned by the same use

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-07 Thread Remy Maucherat
Costin Manolache wrote: No, removing jk2.properties - and removing JkMX - is a good thing. I'll check in the webapp code, it's easier to talk about code - if people don't like it, feel free to -1 :-) In the same spirit, I think we could imagine having a webapp for dynamic configuration of java lo

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-06 Thread Dominik Drzewiecki
I couldn't get the attach to process thing to work, though (= without a port). Is it supposed to be doable ? Neither have I (I am talking of tomcat running as Windows service). It seems that both processes : tomcat JVM and jconsole JVM have to be owned by the same user. Maybe that is the case w

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-06 Thread Remy Maucherat
Costin Manolache wrote: Remy Maucherat wrote: Dominik Drzewiecki wrote: Why don't we dump the JkMX and just settle for the facilities provided by Java 5 configurable via standard system properties: -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote alone for local JVM monioring or -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote -D

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-06 Thread Costin Manolache
Remy Maucherat wrote: Dominik Drzewiecki wrote: Why don't we dump the JkMX and just settle for the facilities provided by Java 5 configurable via standard system properties: -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote alone for local JVM monioring or -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote -Dcom.sun.management.jmxre

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-06 Thread Remy Maucherat
Dominik Drzewiecki wrote: Hi, Not sure what's the new policy for loading the Jmx RMI connector. jk2.properties was a hack - and now that it is removed, I was wandering if we have any "official" mechanism. At the moment, jk2.properties is still used (we're just not shipping the default

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-05 Thread Dominik Drzewiecki
>> Hi, >> >> Not sure what's the new policy for loading the Jmx RMI connector. >> jk2.properties was a hack - and now that it is removed, I was >> wandering if >> we have any "official" mechanism. >> > > At the moment, jk2.properties is still used (we're just not shipping the > > default on

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-05 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:47 PM Subject: Re: JMX Remote connection Bill Barker wrote: - Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAI

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-05 Thread Costin Manolache
Bill Barker wrote: - Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:06 PM Subject: JMX Remote connection Hi, Not sure what's the new policy for loading the Jmx RMI connector. jk2.prop

Re: JMX Remote connection

2004-10-05 Thread Bill Barker
- Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 10:06 PM Subject: JMX Remote connection Hi, Not sure what's the new policy for loading the Jmx RMI connector. jk2.properties was a hack -

JMX Remote connection

2004-10-05 Thread Costin Manolache
Hi, Not sure what's the new policy for loading the Jmx RMI connector. jk2.properties was a hack - and now that it is removed, I was wandering if we have any "official" mechanism. I had a small class that hooked in the connector, and I now refactored it to a webapp - nothing fancy ( it's not eve