Re: [IndexedDB] setVersion blocked on uncollected garbage IDBDatabases

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Drew Wilson <atwilson@google.com> wrote:

> This discussion reminds me of a similar issue with MessagePorts. The
> original MessagePort spec exposed GC behavior through the use of onclose
> events/closed attributes on MessagePorts. It turns out that on Chromium,
> there are situations where it's very difficult for us to GC MessagePorts (a
> port's reachability depends on the reachability of the entangled port on an
> entirely separate process), and so we just don't.


Err, so you just leak MessagePorts?  Or just in those situations, whatever
they are?  Does this happen even for the implicit MessagePort associated
with each worker?

-- 
Glenn Maynard