- From: Joshua Bell <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2016 12:21:05 -0800
- To: w3c/IndexedDB <IndexedDB@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3c/IndexedDB/issues/19/182045396@github.com>
My assumption is that we'd support this anywhere the spec uses _query_ as a parameter and accepts a key-or-range today, namely: * IDBObjectStore * delete — deletes all * count — counts all * get — gets first * getKey — gets first key * getAll — gets all * getAllKeys — gets all keys * openCursor — iterates over all * openKeyCursor — iterates over all * IDBIndex * count — counts all * get — gets first * getKey — gets first key * getAll — gets all * getAllKeys — gets all keys * openCursor — iterates over all * openKeyCursor — iterates over all Order of results needs to be defined for everything except delete and count. E.g., assume a store that contains records with keys 1, 2, 3, 4: `store.openCursor(new IDBKeySet(4, 3, 2, 1))` — Iteration: what order? `store.getAll(new IDBKeySet(4, 3, 2, 1))` — Compound result: what order? `store.get(new IDBKeySet(4, 3, 2, 1))` — Single result: but which? This impacts how we'd write algorithms like _steps for retrieving a value from an object store_ when we use a generic _query_ instead of a _range_ as input, which e.g. currently says _Let record be the first record in store's list of records whose key is in range, if any._ If we treat "set" as a new type of query then logically we'd say "first record in store's list of records whose key matches query" and then define "matches query" to handle sets or ranges. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/19#issuecomment-182045396
Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2016 20:21:39 UTC