W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > July 2013

Re: Communicating memory pressure in mediastream recording

From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:32:45 +1200
Message-ID: <CAOp6jLboswyumyXt-c-+c7u-R6L6qbWLuhFV5Syh2_Vk6RZ0Gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rachel Blum <groby@chromium.org>
Cc: Greg Billock <gbillock@google.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Rachel Blum <groby@chromium.org> wrote:

> Curious - if we implement disk backing store, should the disk space usage
> count against the temporary HTML5 storage? (In which case the app could
> query usage/quota for a bit more fine-grained control than LOW_MEMORY)

I think temporary storage that will go away when the page closes should be
in a different bucket from storage that will survive the page. The latter
is likely to be much more valuable than the former.

Jtehsauts  tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy  Mdaon  yhoaus  eanuttehrotraiitny  eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o  Whhei csha iids  teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d  'mYaonu,r  "sGients  uapr,e  tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr  atnod  sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t"  uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n?  gBoutt  uIp
waanndt  wyeonut  thoo mken.o w  *
Received on Tuesday, 30 July 2013 23:33:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:18 UTC