Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Create Base Server #32066

Closed
wants to merge 9 commits into from
Closed

Create Base Server #32066

wants to merge 9 commits into from

Conversation

shuding
Copy link
Member

@shuding shuding commented Dec 2, 2021

#31506: Similar to the approaches in #31971 and #32058, this PR creates a NextNodeServer class and will extend node-specific APIs on top of the base server class.

next-server stays unchanged, but it now extends the base-server with Node specific APIs. Note that this is just an initial PR which is not complete.

Bug

  • Related issues linked using fixes #number
  • Integration tests added
  • Errors have helpful link attached, see contributing.md

Feature

  • Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
  • Related issues linked using fixes #number
  • Integration tests added
  • Documentation added
  • Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
  • Errors have helpful link attached, see contributing.md

Documentation / Examples

  • Make sure the linting passes by running yarn lint

@ijjk ijjk added created-by: Next.js team PRs by the Next.js team type: next labels Dec 2, 2021
@ijjk

This comment has been minimized.

@shuding shuding marked this pull request as ready for review December 2, 2021 23:16
Copy link
Contributor

@devknoll devknoll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please change this to use composition rather than inheritance 🙏 🙏 🙏 We're already brushing up on the limits here: next-dev-server extends next-node-server, but what if we want to share functions between a node dev server and a different type?

What does getHasStaticDir even mean in a server without a filesystem? Etc

Instead, NextServer should just be an object that can be constructed with options, and we should use those options to tailor to the behavior. For example:

// The standalone Node.js Server might be constructed like this:
const server = new NextServer({
  routes: [
    ...routesFromStaticDir(join(dir, 'static')),
    ...routesFromPagesManifest(join(serverBuildDir, PAGES_MANIFEST)),
  ]
})

// The Vercel minimal-mode server might be constructed like this:
const server = new NextServer({
  // Note: static files are served by the CDN, not `NextServer`
  ...routesFromPagesManifest(join(serverBuildDir, PAGES_MANIFEST)),
})

With an approach like this, the base NextServer doesn't need to know what a PagesManifest is, what a MiddlewareManifest is, etc. In fact, once you take this to the extreme, NextServer actually just becomes a router...

@@ -612,6 +607,22 @@ export default class Server {
return this.getPrerenderManifest().preview
}

protected getPagesManifest(): PagesManifest | undefined {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't these go in the Node impl?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the idea is to move things progressively

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah this is just an initial PR and then we can move things in parallel.

packages/next/server/next-server.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
protected generatePublicRoutes(): Route[] {
if (!fs.existsSync(this.publicDir)) return []
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Doesn't this depend on the server (i.e. whether an fs is available)?

@@ -700,6 +700,13 @@ export default class DevServer extends Server {
})
}

protected getPagesManifest(): undefined {
return undefined
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd maybe make it throw as it is totally unexpected to call this in the dev server.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I refactored the base class to make the constructor always call this method, because it doesn’t know if it’s extended by the dev server or not

@@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ export default class Server {

this.distDir = join(this.dir, this.nextConfig.distDir)
this.publicDir = join(this.dir, CLIENT_PUBLIC_FILES_PATH)
this.hasStaticDir = !minimalMode && fs.existsSync(join(this.dir, 'static'))
this.hasStaticDir = !minimalMode && this.getHasStaticDir()
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe instead of a method we can make this a property that must be initialized by the constructor of the implementing class.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes let's do that in follow-up PRs! Gonna ship this one first so it will unblock us.

@@ -612,6 +607,22 @@ export default class Server {
return this.getPrerenderManifest().preview
}

protected getPagesManifest(): PagesManifest | undefined {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the idea is to move things progressively

@shuding
Copy link
Member Author

shuding commented Dec 3, 2021

@devknoll

Instead, NextServer should just be an object that can be constructed with options, and we should use those options to tailor to the behavior

I think this will be a longer term goal that needs even more work, it also requires use to rewrite the places where we initiate a NextServer/NextDevServer so we can pass those manifests etc. to the constructor.

Also, one concern of this is bundle size since all the logic will be existing in the Server class as different branches, even if it’s not needed by the current runtime.

but what if we want to share functions between a node dev server and a different type

We can make those utils so they can be shared across runtimes.

What does getHasStaticDir even mean in a server without a filesystem? Etc

Those are the things that we can abstract out further, to make the methods of the base class minimal as possible, and runtime agnostic. In the getHasStaticDir case we can rename it to getHasStaticFallbacks For example, and extend it with fs impl in the node server and return false for other runtimes.

@ijjk

This comment has been minimized.

@ijjk

This comment has been minimized.

huozhi
huozhi previously approved these changes Dec 3, 2021
Copy link
Member

@huozhi huozhi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Continue in the following PRs sounds good to me
Hold until we could launch this

@shuding shuding requested review from huozhi and removed request for karaggeorge December 3, 2021 18:31
@ijjk

This comment has been minimized.

@ijjk
Copy link
Member

ijjk commented Dec 3, 2021

Stats from current PR

Default Build (Decrease detected ✓)
General Overall increase ⚠️
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
buildDuration 20.4s 20.7s ⚠️ +298ms
buildDurationCached 3.8s 3.8s -7ms
nodeModulesSize 347 MB 347 MB ⚠️ +3.19 kB
Page Load Tests Overall decrease ⚠️
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
/ failed reqs 0 0
/ total time (seconds) 3.317 3.369 ⚠️ +0.05
/ avg req/sec 753.67 742.13 ⚠️ -11.54
/error-in-render failed reqs 0 0
/error-in-render total time (seconds) 1.471 1.505 ⚠️ +0.03
/error-in-render avg req/sec 1700.06 1661.32 ⚠️ -38.74
Client Bundles (main, webpack, commons)
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
450.HASH.js gzip 179 B 179 B
framework-HASH.js gzip 42.2 kB 42.2 kB
main-HASH.js gzip 28.4 kB 28.4 kB
webpack-HASH.js gzip 1.45 kB 1.45 kB
Overall change 72.3 kB 72.3 kB
Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
polyfills-HASH.js gzip 31 kB 31 kB
Overall change 31 kB 31 kB
Client Pages
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
_app-HASH.js gzip 1.37 kB 1.37 kB
_error-HASH.js gzip 194 B 194 B
amp-HASH.js gzip 312 B 312 B
css-HASH.js gzip 326 B 326 B
dynamic-HASH.js gzip 2.38 kB 2.38 kB
head-HASH.js gzip 350 B 350 B
hooks-HASH.js gzip 635 B 635 B
image-HASH.js gzip 4.49 kB 4.49 kB
index-HASH.js gzip 263 B 263 B
link-HASH.js gzip 1.87 kB 1.87 kB
routerDirect..HASH.js gzip 321 B 321 B
script-HASH.js gzip 383 B 383 B
withRouter-HASH.js gzip 318 B 318 B
85e02e95b279..7e3.css gzip 107 B 107 B
Overall change 13.3 kB 13.3 kB
Client Build Manifests
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
_buildManifest.js gzip 460 B 460 B
Overall change 460 B 460 B
Rendered Page Sizes
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
index.html gzip 531 B 531 B
link.html gzip 544 B 544 B
withRouter.html gzip 526 B 526 B
Overall change 1.6 kB 1.6 kB

Default Build with SWC (Increase detected ⚠️)
General Overall increase ⚠️
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
buildDuration 22s 21.9s -55ms
buildDurationCached 3.7s 3.8s ⚠️ +76ms
nodeModulesSize 347 MB 347 MB ⚠️ +3.19 kB
Page Load Tests Overall increase ✓
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
/ failed reqs 0 0
/ total time (seconds) 3.291 3.307 ⚠️ +0.02
/ avg req/sec 759.73 755.97 ⚠️ -3.76
/error-in-render failed reqs 0 0
/error-in-render total time (seconds) 1.547 1.503 -0.04
/error-in-render avg req/sec 1616.08 1663.29 +47.21
Client Bundles (main, webpack, commons)
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
450.HASH.js gzip 179 B 179 B
framework-HASH.js gzip 42.3 kB 42.3 kB
main-HASH.js gzip 28.6 kB 28.6 kB
webpack-HASH.js gzip 1.44 kB 1.44 kB
Overall change 72.5 kB 72.5 kB
Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
polyfills-HASH.js gzip 31 kB 31 kB
Overall change 31 kB 31 kB
Client Pages
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
_app-HASH.js gzip 1.35 kB 1.35 kB
_error-HASH.js gzip 180 B 180 B
amp-HASH.js gzip 305 B 305 B
css-HASH.js gzip 321 B 321 B
dynamic-HASH.js gzip 2.37 kB 2.37 kB
head-HASH.js gzip 342 B 342 B
hooks-HASH.js gzip 622 B 622 B
image-HASH.js gzip 4.53 kB 4.53 kB
index-HASH.js gzip 256 B 256 B
link-HASH.js gzip 1.9 kB 1.9 kB
routerDirect..HASH.js gzip 314 B 314 B
script-HASH.js gzip 375 B 375 B
withRouter-HASH.js gzip 309 B 309 B
85e02e95b279..7e3.css gzip 107 B 107 B
Overall change 13.3 kB 13.3 kB
Client Build Manifests
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
_buildManifest.js gzip 458 B 458 B
Overall change 458 B 458 B
Rendered Page Sizes
vercel/next.js canary shuding/next.js shu/084c Change
index.html gzip 532 B 532 B
link.html gzip 546 B 546 B
withRouter.html gzip 526 B 526 B
Overall change 1.6 kB 1.6 kB
Commit: b9f02ac

@shuding shuding closed this Dec 3, 2021
@shuding shuding deleted the shu/084c branch December 3, 2021 23:59
@shuding shuding mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2021
10 tasks
@shuding
Copy link
Member Author

shuding commented Dec 4, 2021

Created #32105 instead.

@shuding shuding mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2021
10 tasks
kodiakhq bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2021
Same as #32105 (closed due to conflicts):

> Explained in #32066, rename next-server as base-server and extend NextNodeServer on top of it.
>
> Note that this is just an initial PR so no method is ported.

## Bug

- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`

## Feature

- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`

## Documentation / Examples

- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `yarn lint`
@vercel vercel locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 27, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants