1

I'm getting into using IndexedDB. Thought I'd grab Parashuram's jQuery wrapper for it.

However, there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of information regarding IndexedDB lying around the internet.

Does anyone know what the I/O speeds are like on IndexedDB, preferably browser-specific? Is there any way to measure it? How would using the jQuery wrapper (as well as the polyfill shim to make it work in Opera/Safari) affect these speeds?

Reason I'm asking is I thought to store snippets of HTML content in the base, but maybe I shouldn't bother if fetching it would take longer than browser cache or similar.

Improve this question
3
  • LocalStorage is in memory object. No db will faster then that
    – Kyaw Tun
    Commented Jan 27, 2013 at 0:15
  • True, but the 5mb limit of localStorage in some browsers is an issue for me. It seems that even though IndexedDB is significantly slower than localStorage, the operations/second is still in the high thousands, so the difference should likely not be noticeable. Or..?
    – Emphram Stavanger
    Commented Jan 27, 2013 at 0:21
  • 1
    It is async, so it can take whatever it need to do like waiting for user confirmation or waiting io lock. Other than that the raw speed is very fast, around few ms.
    – Kyaw Tun
    Commented Jan 27, 2013 at 1:14

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

It depends on the browser your are using.

My experience is that IE 10 is pretty fast, compared to chrome and FireFox. Try my QUnit test I wrote for my framework, and you will really see the difference. Of course this isn't a benchmark test, only test of functionality.

Improve this answer
4
  • Interesting... I ran the tests several times, and random tests seem to take a moment longer than the others each run on my Chrome. I also found this: jsperf.com/indexeddb-vs-localstorage/16 which suggests that while IndexedDB definitely kicks WebSQL's ass, it is still 6½ times slower than localStorage. Do you think the difference is noticeable? Only reason I don't use localStorage is its demonstrably minimal maximum size on Chrome et al.
    – Emphram Stavanger
    Commented Jan 26, 2013 at 14:58
  • 1
    Disadvantage of localstorage is the storage limit of 5mb. Also it doesn't have a structured way to save data. Also you are saving string values in case of localstorage in stead of objects. Last indexeddb provides a way to filter data, with localstorage it is always in memory
    – Kristof Degrave
    Commented Jan 26, 2013 at 16:01
  • Do you have any experience with the polyfill shim to make IndexedDB work in Opera/Safari? In those browsers, performance doesn't concern me so much, but I am concerned of the upper limit in storage.
    – Emphram Stavanger
    Commented Jan 26, 2013 at 16:33
  • The page with my tests includes a the indexeddbshim, so try it out. Several test will fail because the error handling isn't like it is specified in the API. But the green path should work correct.
    – Kristof Degrave
    Commented Jan 26, 2013 at 17:06

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.