Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A future for SQL on the web

jlongster.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 227 posts

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#51

Post by pornel »

EvanAnderson wrote: post #4

This is funny and sad to me. We had SQLite in the browser[0]. I only did a little bit of work with it but it seemed actually pretty nice. It was torpedoed because it was SQL-based (and not trendy "key value" and "web scale"). There was the whole excuse that the specification was "whatever SQLite does" and, therefore, not suitable for being a standard. There would be worse things than SQLite upon which to base a stand…

I think the current state is fine. You ship your WASM-blob of SQLite, which has the exact bug-compatible version of SQLite that you've tested your app against. The browsers are not burdened with maintaining a huge API surface that can "break the web".

Otherwise you'd have to deal with different versions of SQLite in different browsers, most likely outdated, with many options turned off. SQLite is full of quirks and gotchas, so it's safest to ship your version in your app.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#52

Post by da_chicken »

adam12 wrote: post #47
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

Tim Cook basically lied to Congress when he stated that developers can create web apps as an alternative to using the app store. Edit: In order for this to be true, Apple (at the very least) needs to enable push notifications and an install prompt for progressive web apps.

I mean, he's correct in the same sense that a Buick can't be made to haul a fifth wheel trailer. It's because a modern Buick's design doesn't include the bed required to install the fifth wheel on.

Nevermind that there's nothing strictly stopping GM from changing the designs for Buicks to include a vehicle capable of a fifth wheel mount.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#53

Post by enkrs »

adam12 wrote: post #47
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

Tim Cook basically lied to Congress when he stated that developers can create web apps as an alternative to using the app store. Edit: In order for this to be true, Apple (at the very least) needs to enable push notifications and an install prompt for progressive web apps.

If you add the website to homescreen (make it an “app”) then the 7 day storage limit does not apply.

This makes total sense to me, and I’m happy Facebook can’t store tracking data in my Safari for longer than 7 days.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#54

Post by sroussey »

lowwave wrote: post #48
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

I wish every browser does that! Web site has no business storing data on my computer more than 4093 bytes (that is already too much) per domain in my computer just because I visited a web page. 10 MB - 10GB of data is too much.

Yes, send all your data to someone’s server instead.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#55

Post by jlongster »

mg wrote: post #50
jlongster wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the post? This project does exactly that. (but focuses in IndexedDB for now because it's the only cross-browser thing that works. I actually tried a webkitFileSystem backend and it was slower)

Well, I woudln't call using IndexedDB "exactly that". As IndexedDB is rather fleeting. You don't use a server, that is correct. But IndexedDB goes away under many circumstances. Saving a file via the File System Access API would give the user peace of mind that it is safe. I did not see any mention of the File System Access API in your post.

Read harder. https://jlongster.com/future-sql-web#more-than-just-another-...

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#56

Post by beebeepka »

lowwave wrote: post #48
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

I wish every browser does that! Web site has no business storing data on my computer more than 4093 bytes (that is already too much) per domain in my computer just because I visited a web page. 10 MB - 10GB of data is too much.

I think that's a valid concern. Stuff like this should only be allowed after a prompt where the user explicitly allows it, just like any other permission

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#57

Post by andrewcl »

adam12 wrote: post #47
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

Tim Cook basically lied to Congress when he stated that developers can create web apps as an alternative to using the app store. Edit: In order for this to be true, Apple (at the very least) needs to enable push notifications and an install prompt for progressive web apps.

I'd assume Tim has a different definition of what an app is than what you're thinking of.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#58

Post by bob1029 »

> SQLite, even though it’s implemented on top of IndexedDB, easily beats out IndexedDB in every single performance metric. The absurdity!

This really is quite incredible. Same idea extends to your filesystem too. Tracking millions of 1KB objects on disk? You could load the whole set into memory substantially faster from SQLite using the same disk. If WAL is enabled with reasonable sync flags, the same applies going back out to disk as well.

SQLite is the most powerful dependency that our product uses today. We have been using it in production as the sole persistence mechanism for 100% of our data for the last 5-6 years now. Recently, we have started leveraging the actual SQL engine to process all of our business logic as well.

Re: A future for SQL on the web

#59

Post by cosmie »

adam12 wrote: post #47
lioeters wrote: post #32

> browsers may delete your IndexedDB database under certain conditions Safari will happily delete your IndexedDB database after 7 days of inactivity. It deletes "all of a website’s script-writable storage after seven days of Safari use without user interaction on the site". That includes: - Indexed DB - LocalStorage - Media keys - SessionStorage - Service Worker registrations and cache Source: https://webkit.org/blog…

Tim Cook basically lied to Congress when he stated that developers can create web apps as an alternative to using the app store. Edit: In order for this to be true, Apple (at the very least) needs to enable push notifications and an install prompt for progressive web apps.

PWA are explicitly exempt from the data storage wipe behavior[1]. So there's that, at least. For now.

Although I agree that it's a fairly minor win in the grand scheme of how handicapped PWA's are on iOS. And like you said, the lack of install prompts and tucking away the PWA "installation" option in the share menu makes it less than intuitive and requires manual awareness efforts by devs[2].

[1] Last section of https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/

[2] https://michaellisboa.com/blog/prompt-ios

Post reply on HN