[Proxool-developer] (no subject)

[Andrew B. <ne...@my...>]

Hello all

>
>
>> In case of the servlet engine I would sugest a Proxool Control Panel
>> having a form of servlet and swing application or a java bean with UI
>> customizer.  =20
>
>
> Are we getting into jmx territory here?
> =20
>
We could touch this. I don't see any problems. The main competitor of Proxo=
ol - PoolMan was jmx compatible.

>  http://java.sun.com/products/JavaManagement/
>
> We might end up righting a JMX component sometime.
>
> =20
>
>> What I meant exactly is how Proxool react to framework state changes.
>>  =20
>
>
> What sort of state changes are you thinking of? I can think of 1)
> Configuration, 2) Shutdown.
>
> We now have that behaviour with ServletConfigurator and
> AvalonConfigurator. The API already allows you to do all these things,
> no?
> =20
>
Let's say we provide few reactions of proxool which are supposed to be mapp=
ed by framework proxy on framework's events. E.g.: we use a proxool insid=
e of web application and we have to close connections on destroying of th=
is application. We cannot wait for JVM shutdown. In this case web applica=
tion is the framework in which the proxool is nested. Not the servlet eng=
ine! When the web application receives Destroy message (destroy method is=
 called) it invokes shutdownHook of proxool facade. The fail-over is not =
responsibility of proxool unless it happens inside of proxool. If mention=
ed above web application has failed the proxool should receive the same s=
hutdown message (facade shutdownHook is called) or another message like r=
einitialize the pools or what is most fit the requirements.

Andrew