On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:02 AM, ben turner <bent.mozilla@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> Also, what should we do when you enqueue a setVersion transaction and > then > >>> close the database handle? Maybe an ABORT_ERR there too? > >> > >> Yeah, that'd make sense to me. Just like if you enque any other > >> transaction and then close the db handle. > > > > We don't abort transactions that are already in progress when you call > > db.close()... We just set a flag and prevent further transactions from > > being created. > > Doh! Of course. > > If the setVersion transaction has started then we should definitely > allow it finish, just like all other transactions. I don't have a > strong opinion on if we should let the setVersion transaction start if > it hasn't yet. Seems most consistent to let it, but if there's a > strong reason not to I could be convinced. > What if you have two database connections open and both do a setVersion transaction and one calls .close (to yield to the other)? Neither can start until one or the other actually is closed. If a database is closed (not just close pending) then I think we need to abort any blocked setVersion calls. If one is already running, it should certainly be allowed to finish before we close the database. J
Received on Thursday, 17 February 2011 19:51:21 UTC