408646 - Allow specification of an alternate database for the storage provider

Status: VERIFIED INVALID

(Calendar :: Provider: Local Storage, defect)

Description

[Philipp Kewisch [:Fallen] [:📆][:🧩]]

Attachment: Allow different databases for storage calendar

As a first step towards offline support, we want to allow specification of an alternate filename for the sqlite file, to later allow using an "offline.sdb" to store offline data.

This is also a first step for bug 328603 and its dependancies. Further steps in that direction would include changing the extension and writing migration code to move the storage.sdb file to the new extension.

A small fix to the properties system is also contained. Currently, if you used setProperty() on an item and assign something other than a string or number (possibly other values?), the storage service will throw an error while writing the Properties. The last hunk of this patch silently ignores that error so that non-serializable data will remain empty.

I also took the liberty to un-anonymize the function names in the storage provider.

Comment 1

[Michiel van Leeuwen (email: mvl+moz@)]

You can already use a file:// uri. Is that not enough? If not, why not make the moz-storage:// uri that's currently used a bit smarter, instead of adding a property?

Comment 2

[Daniel Boelzle [:dbo]]

Comment on attachment 293488 [details] [diff] [review]
Allow different databases for storage calendar

As discussed, IMO it's sufficient and more flexible to use the uri setter for this purpose. Besides that, I like that the patch you postpones database creation (ensureDatabaseConnection).

Comment 3

[Stefan Sitter [:ssitter]]

I suggest to follow the Toolkit/Firefox procedure and name new database files with the suffix .sqlite instead of .sdb.

Comment 4

[Philipp Kewisch [:Fallen] [:📆][:🧩]]

Not needed anymore, closing.