feat(with-storage-sync): indexeddb support

[mzkmnk]

Issue

#111

Content

In this PR, we modified withStorageSync to support IndexedDB.

Breaking Changes

• The storage argument of withStorageSync has been renamed to storageType and now accepts one of three strings: localStorage, sessionStorage, or indexedDB.
• When indexedDB is selected as the storageType, two new arguments, dbName and storeName, are added (where dbName represents the database name and storeName is analogous to a table name in a relational database).
• The functions clearStorage, readFromStorage, and writeToStorage are now treated as asynchronous.

Sample Code

const TodoIndexedDBSync = signalStore(
  withState<...>({...}),
  withStorageSync(
    {
        storage:'indexedDB',
        dbName:'ngrx-toolkit',
        storeName:'users',
    },
  ),
  withMethods((store) => ({...}))
);

[rainerhahnekamp]

@mzkmnk looks good, but I initially meant that we integrate this into the existing withStorageSync. Like how withGlitchTracking or withDisabledNameIndices is done for withDevtools.

You will very likely have to adapt the code of withStorageSync to make this happen.

The reason for not bringing up a second storage syncer extension is that we can reuse parts of its code (like serialization)

[mzkmnk]

@rainerhahnekamp
I’m going to create a withIndexedDB to integrate with withStorageSync, taking inspiration from withDevtools, withGlitchTracking, and withDisabledNameIndices! It might take some time though… :)

[rainerhahnekamp]

@mzkmnk

It might take some time though… :)

Sure, if you have some work to delegate to me, let me know.

[audhit]

@mzkmnk great work mate :) Thanks a lot. Hi @rainerhahnekamp can you please guide me how to use it and which version of the toolkit has this feature? Will it gonna be 19.0.3 ? Please let me know. Thanks in advance 🙏

[rainerhahnekamp]

@audhit it is still in development. Once @mzkmnk is done, he will push the "Ready for review" button.

[mzkmnk]

@rainerhahnekamp
I’ve finished the withIndexedDB method (although I haven’t written any tests yet). I’m planning to do some more refactoring—do you have any advice? Also, do you think it would be acceptable to wrap the read and write methods of withStorageSync in something like Promise.resolve() so that they are handled asynchronously?

[rainerhahnekamp]

@mzkmnk big thanks for now. I will check the code asap and i do understand the potential necessity of async methods.

[mzkmnk]

@rainerhahnekamp
I have integrated IndexedDB into withStorageSync. Although all the functions have become asynchronous, I believe the usability hasn’t changed significantly. If it seems acceptable to proceed as is, I plan to update the tests and request a review.

[rainerhahnekamp]

@mzkmnk Thanks for the update. Once you're ready for the review, let me know. Until then 👍good work

[audhit]

@rainerhahnekamp I have integrated IndexedDB into withStorageSync. Although all the functions have become asynchronous, I believe the usability hasn’t changed significantly. If it seems acceptable to proceed as is, I plan to update the tests and request a review.

@mzkmnk great work, eagerly waiting for it 👍

[mzkmnk]

@rainerhahnekamp
The code is complete. Please review it

[mzkmnk]

@rainerhahnekamp

change PR #134