This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 9880 - noticed the comment about per-source mutexes for storage. If that's not desired, an approach that has worked well in other API designs is an application-selectable mutex per context. Thus, each localStorage object could have a "_mutex" property, which by
Summary: noticed the comment about per-source mutexes for storage. If that's not desi...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: Other other
: P3 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-06-08 16:19 UTC by contributor
Modified: 2010-10-04 14:32 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments

Description contributor 2010-06-08 16:19:34 UTC 
Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#manually-releasing-the-storage-mutex

Comment:
 noticed the comment about per-source mutexes for storage.  If that's not
desired, an approach that has worked well in other API designs is an
application-selectable mutex per context. Thus, each localStorage object could
have a "_mutex" property, which by default is initialized to (for example) the
name of the remote serving host. If the application code assigns another
string to the _mutex property, that creates a new mutex shared by all contexts
that have that property value. If the application code assigns null to the
property, operations are not interlocked (and thus may race with any other
operation, even interlocked operations).  This probably still has some
implementation issues (it's probably additional complexity than the per-source
mutex), but it allows applications to decide whether they want performance or
safety, with the default being safety. 

Posted from: 208.80.119.3
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2010-08-27 05:01:43 UTC 
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: I don't think most Web authors are really in a position to make that judgement call.