-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26k
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
Reduce FS access for incremental cache #57902
Conversation
Current dependencies on/for this PR:
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. |
ca2e2cb
to
ed7d539
Compare
Stats from current PRDefault Build (Increase detected
|
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
buildDuration | 11.7s | 11.5s | N/A |
buildDurationCached | 6.7s | 7.2s | |
nodeModulesSize | 175 MB | 175 MB | |
nextStartRea..uration (ms) | 432ms | 429ms | N/A |
Client Bundles (main, webpack)
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
199-HASH.js gzip | 30 kB | 30 kB | N/A |
3f784ff6-HASH.js gzip | 53.2 kB | 53.2 kB | ✓ |
494.HASH.js gzip | 182 B | 182 B | ✓ |
framework-HASH.js gzip | 45.5 kB | 45.5 kB | ✓ |
main-app-HASH.js gzip | 254 B | 252 B | N/A |
main-HASH.js gzip | 33.1 kB | 33.1 kB | N/A |
webpack-HASH.js gzip | 1.75 kB | 1.75 kB | N/A |
Overall change | 98.9 kB | 98.9 kB | ✓ |
Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
polyfills-HASH.js gzip | 31 kB | 31 kB | ✓ |
Overall change | 31 kB | 31 kB | ✓ |
Client Pages
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
_app-HASH.js gzip | 205 B | 205 B | ✓ |
_error-HASH.js gzip | 182 B | 181 B | N/A |
amp-HASH.js gzip | 505 B | 507 B | N/A |
css-HASH.js gzip | 322 B | 323 B | N/A |
dynamic-HASH.js gzip | 2.59 kB | 2.59 kB | N/A |
edge-ssr-HASH.js gzip | 258 B | 259 B | N/A |
head-HASH.js gzip | 348 B | 347 B | N/A |
hooks-HASH.js gzip | 369 B | 368 B | N/A |
image-HASH.js gzip | 4.38 kB | 4.38 kB | N/A |
index-HASH.js gzip | 256 B | 256 B | ✓ |
link-HASH.js gzip | 2.67 kB | 2.67 kB | N/A |
routerDirect..HASH.js gzip | 318 B | 318 B | ✓ |
script-HASH.js gzip | 384 B | 383 B | N/A |
withRouter-HASH.js gzip | 319 B | 320 B | N/A |
1afbb74e6ecf..834.css gzip | 106 B | 106 B | ✓ |
Overall change | 885 B | 885 B | ✓ |
Client Build Manifests
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
_buildManifest.js gzip | 484 B | 484 B | ✓ |
Overall change | 484 B | 484 B | ✓ |
Rendered Page Sizes
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
index.html gzip | 528 B | 527 B | N/A |
link.html gzip | 542 B | 544 B | N/A |
withRouter.html gzip | 525 B | 522 B | N/A |
Overall change | 0 B | 0 B | ✓ |
Edge SSR bundle Size Overall increase ⚠️
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
edge-ssr.js gzip | 96.1 kB | 96.4 kB | |
page.js gzip | 140 kB | 140 kB | |
Overall change | 236 kB | 237 kB |
Middleware size
vercel/next.js canary | vercel/next.js refactor/incremental-cache-updates | Change | |
---|---|---|---|
middleware-b..fest.js gzip | 624 B | 626 B | N/A |
middleware-r..fest.js gzip | 148 B | 151 B | N/A |
middleware.js gzip | 24.8 kB | 24.8 kB | ✓ |
edge-runtime..pack.js gzip | 1.92 kB | 1.92 kB | ✓ |
Overall change | 26.8 kB | 26.8 kB | ✓ |
Diff details
Diff for page.js
Diff too large to display
Diff for edge-ssr.js
Diff too large to display
Tests Passed |
for (const param of FLIGHT_PARAMETERS) { | ||
delete req.headers[param.toString().toLowerCase()] | ||
} | ||
stripFlightHeaders(req.headers) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also pulled this out into a helper.
isRevalidate: isSSG, | ||
}, | ||
} | ||
if (routeModule) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Finally I also pulled the helper methods for type detection up and exposed them.
### What? When `FetchCache` is used, cache gets were incorrectly bailing. This would result in unexpected behavior, like continuously revalidating a cache key, as described in #57978. ### Why? #57902 introduced a refactor to the `FileSystemCache` and changed the interface of `get`, but this change was not propagated to `FetchCache`. Specifically, `fetchCache` was removed in favor of a new type `kindHint`. As a result, cache reads would always short circuit because `fetchCache` would never be defined. ### How? This updates the interface on `FetchCache` to match what is defined on the base `CacheHandler`. I've also updated the args to both `get` and `set` to be derived from `CacheHandler` so we don't have any type inconsistencies in the future. I will be following up with a test in the CLI repo to test against a deployed app (since minimalMode cannot be easily mocked in our test suite). Manually verified these changes against the repro in the original issue below, at the following URLs: https://revalidate-vercel-test-iota.vercel.app/fetch-cache-test https://revalidate-vercel-test-iota.vercel.app/revalidate-tag-test Fixes #57978 Fixes #58306
This passes down the route kind information to the incrememntal cache so it no longer needs to test some files existing in order to validate if the file exists or not for a route.