W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2009

[whatwg] Worker feedback

From: timeless <timeless@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 06:57:39 +0300
Message-ID: <26b395e60904062057s47ad33c6nfcd9454eb32e84b2@mail.gmail.com>
FWIW, iirc multiple processes from IE dates to at least IE4

The best url I can find on the subject atm is
<http://aroundcny.com/technofile/texts/bit092098.html>.

Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> There are additional constraints that haven't been mentioned yet... Plugins.
> The current model for plugins is that they execute in a single-threaded
> world. Chrome maintains that model by hosting each plugin in its own process
> and RPC'ing method invocations back and forth between calling pages and the
> plugin instances. All plugin instances (of a given plugin) reside on the
> same thread.

Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org> wrote:
> Why can't instances of a plugin in different browser contexts be hosted
> in separate processes?

Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> It would be expensive, and i think has this would have some correctness
> issues too depending on the plugin. Some plugins depend on instances knowing
> about each other and interoperating with each other out of band of DOM based
> means doing so.

Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:
> And others probably assume they have exclusive access to mutable plugin
> resources on disk.

This seems unlikely. I can run Firefox, Safari, Chrome, IE, Opera, and
others browsers at the same time, heck I can run multiple profiles of
a couple of these (I can't find the option in the current version of
Chrome, but I used it before).
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 20:57:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:11 UTC