On 5/16/13 3:03 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > Is this not the OS.File issue that Vladan mentioned? > > My point is that there doesn't seem to be enough use cases to warrant a > new infrastructure to handle shutdown dependencies.
Well, as we expand our use of OS.File, we start observing a number of issues, most of which do not seem to be due to OS.File itself, but more generally to (chrome) workers. Here are a few: - clients of OS.File need to write their data before OS.File shuts down – that's Vladan's remark; - JS Workers (including OS.File's I/O worker) need to be properly initialized before shut down or to cancel themselves nicely upon shutdown – that's Gabriele's remark; - OS.File itself needs to be informed of shut down to (asynchronously) collect information and print warnings about leaking file descriptors, and also to start rejecting additional requests. That's from the top of my head, I am sure that I am missing a few. As we move as much code as possible to workers/threads, I believe that we are going to suffer from a growing number of such issues. So, yes, I am convinced that we need a way to handle dependencies. Moreover, I believe that we need to make dependencies somewhat explicit, otherwise we will at some point end up with unsatisfiable implicit dependencies and we will need large refactorings to get around these. Cheers, David -- David Rajchenbach-Teller, PhD Performance Team, Mozilla _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform