Since it's threadsafe, it shouldn't be a problem. I obtain the reference and cache it as a static member inside a ServiceLocator. That way it's easy to switch between JNDI and manual configuration. You could probably even have the ServiceLocator switch automatically, depending on if you're running tests or not.
Joe > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Carreira [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:41 PM > To: Joseph Fifield; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Hibernate] Hibernate.cfg.xml without JNDI > > > Hi Joseph, > > Thank you very much! This works great! We're using a static > member var to hold the SessionFactory that is initialized in > a static block. Is this a common pattern for saving the > SessionFactory? > > Thanks again, > > Jason > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joseph Fifield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:21 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [Hibernate] Hibernate.cfg.xml without JNDI > > > > > > Yes, it is possible. Something like this should do the trick: > > > > factory = new Configuration("/hibernate.cfg.xml").configure()[0]; > > > > Joe > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > > Behalf Of Jason Carreira > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 12:13 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: [Hibernate] Hibernate.cfg.xml without JNDI > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to use hibernate.cfg.xml without JNDI? It > would even > > > be enough if Hibernate.configure() would return the > SessionFactory > > > in addition to binding it to the JNDI context, or make it > optional. > > > > > > The reason is, I'm trying to implement Junit tests that > only depend > > > upon getting a database connection, without a container (=JNDI > > > provider) running. I tried using Mock objects, but their > MockContext > > > doesn't seem to actually store the bound objects for > lookup later. I > > > don't really want to have to implement my own in-memory > Context, so > > > I'm wondering why this form of configuration, by far the > easiest, is > > > so limited in what it can do? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jason Carreira > > > > > > -- > > > Jason Carreira > > > Software Architect, Notiva Corp. > > > phone: 585.240.2793 > > > fax: 585.272.8118 > > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --- > > > Notiva - optimizing trade relationships (tm) > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > > > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld > =omething 2 See! > > > http://www.vasoftware.com > > > _______________________________________________ > > > hibernate-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hibernate-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something > > 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com > > _______________________________________________ > > hibernate-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hibernate-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ hibernate-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hibernate-devel
