Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature: OPFS rather than Indexeddb for Persistence #59

Open
2 tasks done
nickchomey opened this issue Apr 7, 2024 · 1 comment
Open
2 tasks done

Feature: OPFS rather than Indexeddb for Persistence #59

nickchomey opened this issue Apr 7, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@nickchomey
Copy link

nickchomey commented Apr 7, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem?

Indexeddb is known to be slow and limited. And, when surreal is an abstraction on top of it, it has to go through many levels of abstractions - surreal.wasm > js > indexeddb > leveldb/sqlite.

(see here for info about how chromium currently uses leveldb - which rocksdb evolved out of - as the backing store for indexeddb, but are changing it to sqlite https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40253999)

Describe the solution

The Origin Private File System (OPFS) is a new-ish browser api that allows for high performance file system access. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/File_System_API/Origin_private_file_system

It has support of all major browsers (look at the opfs-specific footnotes) https://caniuse.com/native-filesystem-api

A high profile example of it being used is SQLite Wasm, which seemingly allows for full sqlite usage in the browser. https://developer.chrome.com/blog/sqlite-wasm-in-the-browser-backed-by-the-origin-private-file-system/

Presumably surreal's rocksdb, speedb, and tikv backends could be used in a similar manner, which would surely simplify and improve performance for your wasm efforts. Likewise surrealkv when that is ready.

Alternative methods

SQLite wasm is getting a lot of attention and would probably be the easiest and most stable option. But it doesn't appear that Surreal uses SQLite as a storage backend, so there's probably no point in looking into it.

SurrealDB version

N/a

Contact Details

Reply to this issue

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • I have searched the existing issues

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
@nickchomey
Copy link
Author

@tobiemh thanks for your attention in the AMA. I forgot that I had already created this issue previously. I just updated it with some more info.

I'm sure this is not a top priority, but surely is worth at least taking into consideration. After all, you added support for the various backends - and are creating your own - for a reason!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants