Invitation for technical discussion on next-generation Thunderbird

Magnus Melin mkmelin+mozilla at
Tue Apr 25 20:57:45 UTC 2017

On 4/24/17 3:30 AM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote:
> I have an old start at 
> <>, although that was 
> mostly focused on a better way of representing the current API in a 
> more asynchronous manner. I've definitely advocated in the past for 
> even stronger changes (most notably, per-account databases rather than 
> per-folder databases, which I think opens us up to better 
> optimizations in cases like deleting messages), but that's hard to 
> retrofit in the current API assumptions (again, assuming that loading 
> a database gets you O(instant) access to any message really cripples 
> what you can do in the DB design space).

That's a very good read, although as you say, keeping a too much baggage.

When thinking fresh, I think it helps a bit to look with one eye on what 
the implementation would be in practice. Whatever route we go we're 
fairly much tied to IndexedDB for... some things. What things is open, 
but there are no other databases web compatible, usable from workers, 
and also having an API full of Promises.

Since mork will need to go, we do need a replacement. There have been a 
lot of talk about "wanted numbers" around these threads. Of course we 
want performance, and it will be as good as it gets. If the performance 
is not what we want, we need to tackle that. If it's not about pure db 
optimization, it's a weigh-off against something else (usually ease of 
access). But I'd still save the talks of expected performance numbers 
for later.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list