- From: Alexey Proskuryakov <ap@webkit.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:45:20 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com>, Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Eric Uhrhane <ericu@google.com>, michaeln@google.com, Darin Fisher <darin@google.com>, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>, Geoffrey Garen <ggaren@apple.com>, jorlow@google.com
25.10.2010, в 16:36, Boris Zbarsky написал(а): >> That may become more common when people start downloading arbitrary files, and storing them to disk with FileWriter. But even years ago, we've been getting performance bugs forcing us to ensure responseText didn't have to be copied for JavaScript access. > > Sure, if people access it over and over. That's fine; not copying it seems orthogonal to what's stored... Another kind of bug reports was that memory taken by XMLHttpRequest wasn't reclaimed fast enough when the object went out of scope. Developers did notice with their typical data sets, so XMLHttpRequest with a long response string is now more likely to trigger garbage collection in WebKit. This is also not a direct proof that doubling memory usage is unacceptable, but I think that it illustrates the point about typical current data set sizes, and how the behavior on these is viewed by developers. - WBR, Alexey Proskuryakov
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 18:45:58 UTC