I think it would be a very interesting experiment, because it would
firewall the SQLite code from Chrome memory stompers (which IMHO are a
much more likely danger than DRAM errors).
-scott
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Peter Kasting <pkast...@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:49 PM, John Abd-El-Malek <j...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> It's about getting rid of nasty problems like the browser process crashing
>> every startup because of a corrupt database and decreasing browser process
>> crashes in general.
>
> I am pretty sure that the sqlite wrapper and sanity checking work that's
> going on is a better fix than moving to a different process. Not only is it
> lower overhead, but we'd have to write error-handling code _anyway_ since
> the sqlite process could crash/fail, so IMO it's extra overhead that doesn't
> buy us anything.
> Not that you're not welcome to try doing it, but I wouldn't waste the time.
> PK
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
