W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Indexed DB: Opening connections, versions, and priority

From: Joshua Bell <jsbell@google.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:44:33 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD649j7xtf=FDW=YxzbYsnLGULT1zjsRhbc5mCYK5ouL07y5oA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Thanks. I remove the algorithm clause, adjusted the first note, and removed
the second.

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html

https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/rev/d98a82375b64

I did not add anything (normative or informative) about the processing of
order of multiple connections that are waiting. Again, all current
implementations appear to do so as FIFO.


On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Joshua Bell <jsbell@google.com> wrote:
> > While looking at a Chrome bug [1], I reviewed the Indexed DB draft,
> section
> > 3.3.1 [2] Opening a database:
> >
> > "These steps are not run for any other connections with the same origin
> and
> > name but with a higher version"
> >
> > And the note: "This means that if two databases with the same name and
> > origin, but with different versions, are being opened at the same time,
> the
> > one with the highest version will attempt to be opened first. If it is
> able
> > to successfully open, then the one with the lower version will receive an
> > error."
> >
> > I interpret that as (and perhaps the spec should be updated to read):
> "This
> > means that if two open requests are made to the database with the same
> name
> > and origin at the same time, the open request with the highest version
> will
> > be processed first. If it is able to successfully open, then the request
> > with the lower version will receive an error."
> >
> > So far as I can tell with a test [3], none of Chrome (33), Firefox (27),
> or
> > IE (10) implement this per spec. Instead of processing the request with
> the
> > highest version first, they process the first request that was received.
> >
> > Is my interpretation of the spec correct?
>
> Yes
>
> > Is my test [3] correct?
>
> Well...
>
> > If yes and yes, should we update the spec to match reality?
>
> Short answer: Yes, I think we can remove the current text from the spec
>
> Long answer: It depends on how one defines "same time". Your testcase
> doesn't open make the open calls at the "same time" but rather one
> after another. Though it's a clever trick to stall them all using a
> delete operation.
>
> But ultimately I think the definition of "same time" is ambiguous
> enough that the current spec language doesn't add any value. So your
> proposed change seem like an improvement.
>
> / Jonas
>
> > [1] https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=225850
> > [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#opening
> > [3] http://jsfiddle.net/Nbg2K/2/
> >
>
Received on Friday, 28 February 2014 18:45:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:22 UTC