W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] .value of no-duplicate cursors

From: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:29:07 +0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTim=hxqpTxEKFqFe3LbG0Lsv=cuLogYuEQXw9vuT@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: ben turner <bent@mozilla.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> This discussion seemed to die off with no clear resolution.
>
> Since I had forgotten about this thread I specified that the first
> item is always the one returned for _NO_DUPLICATE cursors. Where
> "first" means "with lowest object-store key".
>

It seems as though "first" should mean with the highest key in the case of
reverse cursors.  This is how it's implemented in Chromium.

J


> I don't feel strongly either way if they should be removed or not. SQL
> has 'unique', but we of course we're not aiming to match SQL's feature
> set.
>
> / Jonas
>
>
Received on Thursday, 11 November 2010 12:29:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:41 GMT