[whatwg] Worker feedback

[Michael Nordman]

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert at ocallahan.org>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 5:04 AM, 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.
>>>
>>
>> Why can't instances of a plugin in different browser contexts be hosted in
>> separate processes?
>
>
> 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.
>

And others probably assume they have exclusive access to mutable plugin
resources on disk.


>
>
>>
>>
>> Rob
>> --
>> "He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities;
>> the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are
>> healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
>> own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." [Isaiah
>> 53:5-6]
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090406/436704ef/attachment-0002.htm>