On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:45 AM, João Eiras <joao.ei...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> The only solution I can think of is to require (or recommend) that >>> implementations run the garbage collector in a context after firing >>> the "versionchange" event if the database still isn't closed. This >>> should be a rare occurrence simply because setVersion should be rare. >> >> That would be a hack in the implementation and a hack in the spec. > > Why? And what are you suggesting instead?
Don't have a solution, but expecting certain GC behavior on a specification is far from sane.