Re: [w3c/IndexedDB] Expose IndexedDB IDBObjectStore.purge() method (Issue #420)

@evanstade 

> But I am going to hazard a guess that you've encountered this issue on Chromium in particular.

well, that makes Chrome/ium and Edge, where both expose the disk quota used by the IndexedDB, FF and WK don't show that detail so I wouldn't actually know.

> when I write a test app that just writes a bunch of stuff to IDB repeatedly, the size doesn't necessarily behave "rationally" but does not grow without bound either.

If I put to a single object store a buffer with a string key then a string with still a string key and remove these after reading their stored value, I can refresh and see the quota growing each refresh, even if the db is technically empty every single time I start fresh the same page. Not sure this is a Linux thing only neither though, if you can't measure the same.

The thing is, I opened this in WHATWG, they told me to open it in here, now I'm being told to open a bug in Chromium ... well, good news is, nobody will likely fix this if they are already working to move to sqlite, so I rest my case, I agree that there should be no need to compact IDB but if that's inevitable in the name of perf, I would love to be able to shrink and optimize / compact it when needed, for long sessions, or other use cases.

> FWIW WebSQL was deprecated largely because arbitrary websites can't be trusted to inject arbitrary SQL

not the story I knew and followed at that time ... I also provided workarounds based on WASM implementation of SQLite; it's a pity this DB fuels the world of software but not the Web, GMail has been using it forever without issues and I used it without issues in the past ... there are many things the Web can do badly to hurt people, killing features in the name of "*trust*" is really bad, imho, then again, I am sure nothing will change here, so that I need SQLite as WASM that store its whole blob as IndexedDB which in turns is based on SQLite ... how logical is that 😅

Anyway, closing this as it's clear nothing will happen to improve the current status of the API.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/IndexedDB/issues/420#issuecomment-2146811581
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/IndexedDB/issues/420/2146811581@github.com>