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

[FEAT] Webpack stats.json support #118

Closed
tstackhouse opened this issue Dec 22, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

[FEAT] Webpack stats.json support #118

tstackhouse opened this issue Dec 22, 2021 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@tstackhouse
Copy link
Collaborator

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
It doesn't seem like we support the --statsJson option, setting that to true does not produce a stats.json file in dist/apps/<app> the same way that an app using e.g. the angualr devkit builder does.

Describe the solution you'd like
In build.impl.ts in the callback for the webpack process, we have access to the stats object, and can to stats.toJson("verbose") to get the data that a tool like webpack-bundle-analyzer can process.

Describe alternatives you've considered
I'm not sure there's any other good way to evaluate how the build process works and find ways to optimize. I know my use case is a bit unique, we have 70+ lambdas in one app and it results in relatively long builds, and I've actually had to use some custom forks of this library and serverless in order for it to work properly, and have been trying to remedy that now that I have time.

Check which provider is affected:
[] AWS
[] Azure
[] Google Cloud Platform

Check which framework is affected:
[] Angular
[] Nodejs
[x] Serverless
[] Lambda
[] Infrastructure as a code

Additional context
I'm planning on putting together a PR for this shortly, since it's relatively minor.

@tstackhouse tstackhouse added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 22, 2021
@tstackhouse tstackhouse mentioned this issue Dec 22, 2021
6 tasks
@wickstargazer
Copy link
Member

wickstargazer commented Jan 10, 2022

hey we merged and published 1.1.1 but i saw another PR, do we need that to be merged as well?

@tstackhouse
Copy link
Collaborator Author

If you’re good with that PR, it would be awesome if we can get it in, we’ve been trying to get our project into the latest plug-in and serverless 2, but it’s a hefty app and was running into memory issues

@wickstargazer
Copy link
Member

merged and published to 1.1.2

@tstackhouse
Copy link
Collaborator Author

tstackhouse commented Jan 12, 2022

Oh I see you were referring to #120, yes, that was definitely something to be merged (which I see is is merged and released now), as it was a bugfix for this PR.

I was referring to #121. I was on mobile so a long reply is hard to manage.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants