[whatwg] LocalStorage in workers

[Jeremy Orlow]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Michael Nordman <michaeln at google.com>wrote:

> > Is it?  Can you provide some use cases?  :-)
> Um...sure... an app sets up a shared worker whose function it is to sync
> up/down changes to the data the application manages...
>
> * pageA makes changes, other pageB sees it by virtue of an event and
> reflects change it it view of the world... worker sees the change to by
> virtue of the same event and pushes it up.
>
> * worker receive delta from server... and makes the change locally... pageA
> and B see that by virtue of the event.
>
>
> What is the use case for silo'd worker storage?
>

I mentioned this earlier and also explained that a work-around is to do this
via message passing rather than shared memory.  As I explained in a couple
emails, shared memory is just an "optimization".  And, as Robert explained,
it's not ever clear whether it's a performance optimization or not...it
might just be a simpler way to program.

When I asked if you had any use cases, I was asking whether there were any
use cases that could not be solved efficiently/reasonably elegantly by
worker-only storage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20090916/9c9f6804/attachment-0001.htm>