- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 16:47:34 -0500
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Jake Archibald <jaffathecake@gmail.com>, public-script-coord <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> > On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Jake Archibald wrote: >> >> New tabs using that ServiceWorker may be open or may open while >> >> you're blocking. Baaaaad slowwww baaaad. >> > >> > I totally agree that it'd be bad to be slow (though honestly, a sync >> > call to a local database isn't generally going to be slower than a >> > network request, so it's not really "slow" by the standards relevant >> > here). >> >> While it's generally faster than the network request itself, it's much >> slower than returning an *instruction* to make a network request, which >> is what a service worker actually does. > > Well, it's what you hope authors will do. I'm sure plenty will be doing > the fetches manually. SW purposely doesn't make that easy, so I doubt they will. It *does* make it easy to resolve the request with a promise for a response, which does what we want. ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2014 21:48:21 UTC