- From: Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 11:20:34 +0000
- To: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:45 AM, Joćo Eiras <joao.eiras@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The only solution I can think of is to require (or recommend) that >>> implementations run the garbage collector in a context after firing >>> the "versionchange" event if the database still isn't closed. This >>> should be a rare occurrence simply because setVersion should be rare. >> >> That would be a hack in the implementation and a hack in the spec. > > Why? And what are you suggesting instead? Don't have a solution, but expecting certain GC behavior on a specification is far from sane.
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 11:21:15 UTC