Add SAP JVM (the proprietary, commercial one) to the recognized hotspot VMs of JMC

[Jie Kang]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 11:13 AM Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
wrote:

> Hi Jie,
>
>
>
> Thanks for replying to that. In the meanwhile, I’ve already run the PR and
> the change is in:
>
>
> https://github.com/openjdk/jmc/commit/b1c9d6420427b6063db5f8fd00512baa4de8f028
>

Ah neat, good to see! I missed that clearly D:


Cheers!


>
>
> Cheers
>
> Christoph
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Jie Kang <jkang at redhat.com>
> *Sent:* Donnerstag, 20. Februar 2020 17:09
> *To:* Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> *Cc:* jmc-dev at openjdk.java.net
> *Subject:* Re: Add SAP JVM (the proprietary, commercial one) to the
> recognized hotspot VMs of JMC
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:04 AM Langer, Christoph <
> christoph.langer at sap.com> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> as you may or may not know, SAP builds and ships a Hotspot JDK that is
> based on Oracle’s commercially licensed sources. You won’t find it so much
> in the free wild, but it is distributed with several SAP products and
> solutions. It goes by the name “SAP JVM”. Currently it is not recognized as
> a hotspot VM in JMC.
>
> As it identifies itself by the system property “java.vm.name = SAP Java
> Server VM”, the detection could be fixed by this little patch:
>
> ---
> a/core/org.openjdk.jmc.common/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmc/common/version/JavaVMVersionToolkit.java
> +++
> b/core/org.openjdk.jmc.common/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmc/common/version/JavaVMVersionToolkit.java
> @@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ public class JavaVMVersionToolkit {
>                 if (vmName == null) {
>                         return false;
>                 }
> -               return vmName.startsWith("Java HotSpot") ||
> vmName.startsWith("OpenJDK"); //$NON-NLS-1$ //$NON-NLS-2$;
> +               return vmName.startsWith("Java HotSpot") ||
> vmName.startsWith("OpenJDK") || vmName.startsWith("SAP"); //$NON-NLS-1$
> //$NON-NLS-2$;
>         }
>
> }
>
> However, I recall there was some discussion when somebody else proposed
> something in this area – so I’d like to ask on the mailing list, before I
> open a PR, whether such a patch would be welcome? ��
>
> Please let me know your thoughts.
>
>
>
> My personal opinion: We're doing it for two names already, if someone is
> willing to provide the patch for their name, sure why not. Maybe eventually
> I'd want to verify if there really is no better way to determine the type
> of JVM or if we even want to have this at all. Another story though.
>
>
>
> On the whole, I think you should open a PR and this kind of discussion
> could still happen and be mirrored appropriately between mailing list and
> the PR comments.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
>
> Thanks & Best regards
> Christoph
>
>