Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by ben_jones on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @11:14AM
(#13472549)
Could you create a tabbed interface that is just a dumb view of a server state communicated over websockets? Then the user could just open the page in n windows (each on its own tab) and have the same state represented in each?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by dumbmatter on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @11:38AM
(#13472851)
Problem is, there is no server. All client side. So the tab on which you click "run simulation" is effectively the "server", except it stops running when the user switches tabs.
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by skykooler on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @11:46AM
(#13472969)
Put two of them in two iframes on the same page? No code changes should be needed
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by xigency on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:04PM
(#13473160)
The fact that you don't have a backend is the limiting factor here.
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by TeMPOraL on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:32PM
(#13473469)
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to not have a backend. In fact, if something can be accomplished without user sending his data to some remote server (as opposed to just fetching data from the server), I believe it should be done this way.
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by dumbmatter on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @12:29PM
(#13473443)
In some ways it's limiting, but overall it's a good thing. Less complexity, less network transfer, works offline, etc. It's just more challenging to do in JS/HTML than in your choice of traditional desktop app dev tools.
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by euyyn on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @01:06PM
(#13473834)
GMail and Google Docs work offline too. Surely with things like Firebase it's less complex than inter-tab communication?
Re:Chrome will aggressively throttle background tabs
by kuschku on Tuesday January 24, 2017 @01:36PM
(#13474134)
Oh, you’re volunteering to pay for it? How nice of you!
</sarcasm>
Cost is a real concern for these things. The tradeoff is running things on client or expensive backend or spending ages building a custom, efficient backend.