[whatwg] Asynchronous database API feedback
oliver at apple.com
Mon Dec 10 12:38:24 PST 2007
On 10/12/2007, at 12:21 PM, Geoffrey Garen wrote:
>> If we cannot provide this, I feel that localstorage will not be
>> successful, so it won't matter what API it uses.
> I think this is a pretty extreme conclusion. My impression is that web
> developers want local storage so badly, they'll use whatever API we
> give them -- even if it's in Haskell :) .
Hey don't knock Haskell ;)
More seriously though, making assumptions about IO performance is never
a good idea -- what happens if the IO is to a low budget/resource device
-- say a handheld or something that uses sdcard storage (which iirc have
slow IO) -- or any form of external storage for that matter? These are
devices that tend to be low power high latency, typically they are slow
to begin with, if you then start putting even slower *blocking*
behaviour it could render any site using the API unusable on such a device.
Also making the assumption that local storage will always be local is
flawed as that assumes that no one uses roaming profiles -- if you were
to require that local storage always use a local device, you are
effectively meaning many corporate users would be unable to use websites
that make use of the API, or even worse occasionally the site will work,
and occasionally it won't, and sometimes it won't have all your data..
More information about the whatwg