Discussion:
JDK-8171311 Current state
(too old to reply)
Patrick Reinhart
2018-12-06 07:58:26 UTC
Permalink
Hi everybody,

I am already done some contributions within the core libs of the JDK and
wanted to ask if I could help in bringing this JEP forward. Looking into
the it the last actions where made mid year- Is there any work being
done here in the mean time?

-Patrick
Alan Bateman
2018-12-06 08:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Patrick Reinhart
Hi everybody,
I am already done some contributions within the core libs of the JDK
and wanted to ask if I could help in bringing this JEP forward.
Looking into the it the last actions where made mid year- Is there any
work being done here in the mean time?
I'm not aware of any current activity on this in OpenJDK. One thing
about the JEP is that it didn't make the case clear as to why the
adapter needed to be in the JDK. There are also several existing JMX
adapters that support REST and it would have been useful to evaluate
those and maybe explore what the pain points and issues are with
deploying these solutions. It might be that the -Dcom.sun.management
mechanism to start the JMX agent needs to be improved, maybe it should
be integrated with -javaagent, maybe the pluggability of the JMX agent
just needs to be improved.

-Alan
Patrick Reinhart
2018-12-07 08:36:33 UTC
Permalink
It's a bit disturbing that just at the time of my question this JEP
has been closed (without any further comment why)

I think that it still would be worth while looking into supporting
a REST based implementation in favour of the existing RMI based
solution just by the fact of the troubles just one can have with
firewalls.

When doing a quick search for JMX REST adapters, I did not found
that many:

- Jolokia (seems to be active) [1]
- Apache ESME - JMX REST API (inactive) [2]
- MX4J (inactive) [3]
- OpenDMK (not found anymore)

-Patrick
Post by Alan Bateman
I'm not aware of any current activity on this in OpenJDK. One thing
about the JEP is that it didn't make the case clear as to why the
adapter needed to be in the JDK. There are also several existing JMX
adapters that support REST and it would have been useful to evaluate
those and maybe explore what the pain points and issues are with
deploying these solutions. It might be that the -Dcom.sun.management
mechanism to start the JMX agent needs to be improved, maybe it should
be integrated with -javaagent, maybe the pluggability of the JMX agent
just needs to be improved.
-Alan
[1] https://jolokia.org/features-nb.html
[2] https://esme.apache.org/docs/apis/jmx-rest-api.html
[3] http://mx4j.sourceforge.net
Alan Bateman
2018-12-07 09:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Patrick Reinhart
It's a bit disturbing that just at the time of my question this JEP
has been closed (without any further comment why)
I suspect your inquiry prompted Raghavan to close it as there isn't (to
my knowledge anyway) anyone actively working on it. I agree a comment is
needed when closing issues.
Post by Patrick Reinhart
I think that it still would be worth while looking into supporting
a REST based implementation in favour of the existing RMI based
solution just by the fact of the troubles just one can have with
firewalls.
Right, and I think there is some interest. In addition to the REST
adapters that you found then I think some of the app servers have
support too. The big question for features like this is whether it is
something that the JDK  has to include or not (the batteries included
vs. batteries available discussion).  If you look at Harsha's prototype
(linked from the JEP) then you'll you see it can be mostly developed in
its own project, the only JDK piece is integrating it with the JMX agent
and existing -Dcom.sun.management options for starting the JMX agent. I
think this is an area that could be improved to make it easier to deploy
JMX adapters that aren't in the JDK.

-Alan
Raghavan Puranam
2018-12-07 09:59:55 UTC
Permalink
My apologies Patrick...I should have added the comment first before closing. I have added it now.

Regards,
Raga

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Bateman
Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 2:52 PM
To: Patrick Reinhart
Cc: serviceability-***@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: JDK-8171311 Current state
Post by Patrick Reinhart
It's a bit disturbing that just at the time of my question this JEP
has been closed (without any further comment why)
I suspect your inquiry prompted Raghavan to close it as there isn't (to
my knowledge anyway) anyone actively working on it. I agree a comment is
needed when closing issues.
Post by Patrick Reinhart
I think that it still would be worth while looking into supporting
a REST based implementation in favour of the existing RMI based
solution just by the fact of the troubles just one can have with
firewalls.
Right, and I think there is some interest. In addition to the REST
adapters that you found then I think some of the app servers have
support too. The big question for features like this is whether it is
something that the JDK  has to include or not (the batteries included
vs. batteries available discussion).  If you look at Harsha's prototype
(linked from the JEP) then you'll you see it can be mostly developed in
its own project, the only JDK piece is integrating it with the JMX agent
and existing -Dcom.sun.management options for starting the JMX agent. I
think this is an area that could be improved to make it easier to deploy
JMX adapters that aren't in the JDK.

-Alan
Patrick Reinhart
2018-12-07 14:11:52 UTC
Permalink
Thanks,

I just found that JEP searching for an simple way to attach to a non
application server VM avoiding the hassle for setting up Firewall Rules
for RMI and that JEP was the first in the list followed by the Jolokia
that seems not jet ready for Java 11...

I will look into the Jolokia library and will try to find out, what the
exact issues with Java 11 are.

Besides that it would really make sense to see if there would be a
better way for starting the JMX services as Alan pointed out.

-Patrick
Post by Raghavan Puranam
My apologies Patrick...I should have added the comment first before
closing. I have added it now.
Regards,
Raga
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Bateman
Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 2:52 PM
To: Patrick Reinhart
Subject: Re: JDK-8171311 Current state
Post by Patrick Reinhart
It's a bit disturbing that just at the time of my question this JEP
has been closed (without any further comment why)
I suspect your inquiry prompted Raghavan to close it as there isn't (to
my knowledge anyway) anyone actively working on it. I agree a comment is
needed when closing issues.
Post by Patrick Reinhart
I think that it still would be worth while looking into supporting
a REST based implementation in favour of the existing RMI based
solution just by the fact of the troubles just one can have with
firewalls.
Right, and I think there is some interest. In addition to the REST
adapters that you found then I think some of the app servers have
support too. The big question for features like this is whether it is
something that the JDK  has to include or not (the batteries included
vs. batteries available discussion).  If you look at Harsha's prototype
(linked from the JEP) then you'll you see it can be mostly developed in
its own project, the only JDK piece is integrating it with the JMX agent
and existing -Dcom.sun.management options for starting the JMX agent. I
think this is an area that could be improved to make it easier to deploy
JMX adapters that aren't in the JDK.
-Alan
Erik Gahlin
2018-12-07 16:44:23 UTC
Permalink
The reason to put this into the JDK is to standardize the protocol.

If you want to build a client today, you must build one for every
adapter because they have different ways to represent URLs etc.

The JDK is in unique position to set the standard, since the
implementation comes by default.

Erik
Post by Patrick Reinhart
Thanks,
I just found that JEP searching for an simple way to attach to a non
application server VM avoiding the hassle for setting up Firewall
Rules for RMI and that JEP was the first in the list followed by the
Jolokia that seems not jet ready for Java 11...
I will look into the Jolokia library and will try to find out, what
the exact issues with Java 11 are.
Besides that it would really make sense to see if there would be a
better way for starting the JMX services as Alan pointed out.
-Patrick
Post by Raghavan Puranam
My apologies Patrick...I should have added the comment first before
closing. I have added it now.
Regards,
Raga
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Bateman
Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 2:52 PM
To: Patrick Reinhart
Subject: Re: JDK-8171311 Current state
Post by Patrick Reinhart
It's a bit disturbing that just at the time of my question this JEP
has been closed (without any further comment why)
I suspect your inquiry prompted Raghavan to close it as there isn't (to
my knowledge anyway) anyone actively working on it. I agree a comment is
needed when closing issues.
Post by Patrick Reinhart
I think that it still would be worth while looking into supporting
a REST based implementation in favour of the existing RMI based
solution just by the fact of the troubles just one can have with
firewalls.
Right, and I think there is some interest. In addition to the REST
adapters that you found then I think some of the app servers have
support too. The big question for features like this is whether it is
something that the JDK has to include or not (the batteries included
vs. batteries available discussion). If you look at Harsha's prototype
(linked from the JEP) then you'll you see it can be mostly developed in
its own project, the only JDK piece is integrating it with the JMX agent
and existing -Dcom.sun.management options for starting the JMX agent. I
think this is an area that could be improved to make it easier to deploy
JMX adapters that aren't in the JDK.
-Alan
Loading...