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

Connection Closing #962

Open
diasdavid opened this Issue Aug 26, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@diasdavid
Member

diasdavid commented Aug 26, 2017

Similar to go-ipfs (Read Connection Closing), js-ipfs is passing through similar hurdles when it comes to managing resources available that are shared amongst the open Connections.

In js-ipfs this is even more noticeable since it has to run in a Browser with an even more constrained envinronment and use a transport that is known as a CPU and memory hog, I'm talking about WebRTC.

If that wasn't enough, Chrome's new policy since version 57 is to aggressively throttle app resources for any tab that is in the background or not in the view of the users (i.e if you switch to another app, Chrome will also throttle the tab even if it remains open). This forces to be extra especially clever of how to maintain things working inside js-ipfs. There is an issue where we discuss this in more detail -- #611.

A quick way to mitigate this is to stick js-ipfs into a Service Worker, however, it has the tradeoff that it won't be able to use WebRTC.

In essence, we do need to solve Connection Closing and Resource Management as part of the protocol and create a model that can be translated between runtimes.

This is one of our top priorities right now.

@diasdavid

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@diasdavid
Member

diasdavid commented Feb 21, 2018

@diasdavid

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@diasdavid

diasdavid Mar 19, 2018

Member

@legastero could you take a look at this one? I bet you will have a lot of input to "managing WebRTC connections memory usage" :)

Member

diasdavid commented Mar 19, 2018

@legastero could you take a look at this one? I bet you will have a lot of input to "managing WebRTC connections memory usage" :)

@lgrahl

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@lgrahl

lgrahl Jul 10, 2018

Be aware that adding worker support to WebRTC is heavily requested and currently being investigated as part of WebRTC NV (next version).

lgrahl commented Jul 10, 2018

Be aware that adding worker support to WebRTC is heavily requested and currently being investigated as part of WebRTC NV (next version).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment