- From: fergald <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 May 2022 22:57:33 -0700
- To: w3c/IndexedDB <IndexedDB@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Received on Monday, 23 May 2022 05:57:45 UTC
Thanks for the clarifications. > We might be able to get away with inserting something akin to "if a transaction could be started if transactions in non-fully-active contexts were aborted, then those transactions must be aborted and the contexts marked unsalvageable" or something. This sounds right to me. Basically if you would block, don't block, make the other context unsalvageable. If there's a clean way to say that great. If it ends up being a lot of work and we go for something more conservative, it could be noted that it is overly-conservative. If we add WPTs we should prioritize the cases that are clearly problematic rather than the cases that are only ruled out because the spec is overly conservative. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/381#issuecomment-1134213219 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <w3c/IndexedDB/issues/381/1134213219@github.com>
Received on Monday, 23 May 2022 05:57:45 UTC