Re: [indexeddb] Missing TransactionInactiveError Exception type for count and index methods

On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>wrote:

> In looking at the count method in IDBObjectStore and IDBIndex we noticed
> that its signature doesn't throw a TransactionInactiveError when the
> transaction being used is inactive.  We would like to add this to the spec.
>

Agreed. FWIW, this matches Chrome's behavior.


> In addition, the index method in IDBObjectStore uses InvalidStateError to
> convey two different meanings: the object has been removed or deleted and
> the transaction being used finished.  It seems that it would be better to
> separate these into:
> * InvalidStateError when the source object has been removed or deleted.
> * TransactionInactiveError when the transaction being used is inactive.
>
> What do you think?  I can open a bug if we agree this is the desired
> behavior.
>

Did this come out of the discussion here:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/1589.html

If so, the rationale for which exception type to use is included, although
no-one on the thread was deeply averse to the alternative. If it's a
different issue can give a more specific example?