W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2011

Re: [chromium-html5] LocalStorage inside Worker

From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 20:05:34 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTimWDoE7WyE-AWeE84s+c3hZaxZ4mb8iRqfAsoHx@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>, Felix Halim <felix.halim@gmail.com>, public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> No, implementing the storage mutex is an orders of magnitude harder
> than implementing a locking mechanism prevents the callback from
> happening in multiple threads at the same time. I'm saying that with
> my implementor hat on. They are two very different types of locks. A
> major difference is that one is grabbed synchronously and the other
> asynchronously.

Either way, if it satisfies the goal of having a strictly-correct spec
and is enough to unblock access to Storage from workers, I'm fine with
that (whether or not the locking is reliably implemented in practice).

Glenn Maynard
Received on Friday, 7 January 2011 01:06:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 14:36:48 UTC