Following up, I think this highlights the distinct set of use cases that shared workers and shared script address:
SharedWorkers are a great platform for when you have a single database that is shared across multiple instances of your web app, and you want to coordinate updates to that database. I can imagine sharing a single connection to the server, etc via SharedWorkers. SharedScripts are a good platform for when you want to share data/code (for example, the immense body of Javascript used to implement the Gmail UI) across multiple windows. I can't speak to whether passing a hidden iframe between windows as was suggested in the other thread would address this use case sufficiently. -atw On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Drew Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe that the offline gmail team uses the Gears flavor of shared > workers and is planning to migrate to the HTML5 version once DB access is > supported from within worker context in shipping browsers. > > So I guess that Gmail would be a candidate app that has asked for both. > > -atw > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Dmitry Titov wrote: >> >> I don't think it's correct to say that SharedWorkers are not useful and >>> "we need a SharedScript instead". They are different things and can address >>> different use cases. For example, SharedWorker is great to make sure there >>> is only one 'app instance' running - exactly because it is shared >>> inter-process, it can be used as a "inter-process synchronization primitive" >>> to control how many app instances are opened. SharedScript is a container >>> for data and code shared between pages that comprise a "web application" and >>> normally run in the same process. As in native apps, whether or not multiple >>> instances of the app can run at the same time depends on the author of the >>> app, and can be done either way. >>> >> >> Are there any Web apps at Google or elsewhere currently using >> SharedWorker? Would any of them still use it if they could switch to >> SharedScript? Has any app team specifically requested support for *both* >> SharedWorker *and* SharedScript? (Serious questions, since the justification >> for SharedScript is largely based on Web developer feedback.) >> >> Note: if SharedScript was really globally shared it could be used to >> implement shared workers - simply have the SharedScript manage the per-app >> Workers. >> >> Regards, >> Maciej >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >> > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
