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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Use updated recursive rm fs method for image-optimizer #34210

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 11, 2022
Merged

Use updated recursive rm fs method for image-optimizer #34210

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 11, 2022

Conversation

ijjk
Copy link
Member

@ijjk ijjk commented Feb 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

This ensures we handle ENOENT with fs.rmdir for Node.js v12 and use fs.rm when available instead as it is the replacement for fs.rmdir with the recursive option.

Bug

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

Fixes: #33860 (comment)

@ijjk ijjk added created-by: Next.js team PRs by the Next.js team. type: next labels Feb 11, 2022
@ijjk ijjk mentioned this pull request Feb 11, 2022
Closed
@ijjk
Copy link
Member Author

ijjk commented Feb 11, 2022

Stats from current PR

Default Build (Increase detected ⚠️)
General Overall increase ⚠️
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
buildDuration 19.6s 18.9s -699ms
buildDurationCached 7.2s 7.6s ⚠️ +356ms
nodeModulesSize 359 MB 359 MB ⚠️ +910 B
Page Load Tests Overall increase ✓
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
/ failed reqs 0 0 ✓
/ total time (seconds) 4.125 4.1 -0.03
/ avg req/sec 606.04 609.68 +3.64
/error-in-render failed reqs 0 0 ✓
/error-in-render total time (seconds) 2.01 1.975 -0.03
/error-in-render avg req/sec 1244.07 1265.76 +21.69
Client Bundles (main, webpack, commons)
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
450.HASH.js gzip 179 B 179 B ✓
framework-HASH.js gzip 42 kB 42 kB ✓
main-HASH.js gzip 27.9 kB 27.9 kB ✓
webpack-HASH.js gzip 1.44 kB 1.44 kB ✓
Overall change 71.5 kB 71.5 kB ✓
Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
polyfills-HASH.js gzip 31 kB 31 kB ✓
Overall change 31 kB 31 kB ✓
Client Pages
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
_app-HASH.js gzip 1.36 kB 1.36 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 2.57 kB 2.57 kB ✓
head-HASH.js gzip 350 B 350 B ✓
hooks-HASH.js gzip 919 B 919 B ✓
image-HASH.js gzip 5.01 kB 5.01 kB ✓
index-HASH.js gzip 263 B 263 B ✓
link-HASH.js gzip 2.26 kB 2.26 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 14.7 kB 14.7 kB ✓
Client Build Manifests
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
_buildManifest.js gzip 459 B 459 B ✓
Overall change 459 B 459 B ✓
Rendered Page Sizes
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
index.html gzip 532 B 532 B ✓
link.html gzip 545 B 545 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 ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
buildDuration 24.3s 23.5s -809ms
buildDurationCached 7.1s 7.7s ⚠️ +585ms
nodeModulesSize 359 MB 359 MB ⚠️ +910 B
Page Load Tests Overall increase ✓
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
/ failed reqs 0 0 ✓
/ total time (seconds) 4.196 4.139 -0.06
/ avg req/sec 595.8 603.94 +8.14
/error-in-render failed reqs 0 0 ✓
/error-in-render total time (seconds) 1.935 1.934 0
/error-in-render avg req/sec 1292.28 1292.64 +0.36
Client Bundles (main, webpack, commons)
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
450.HASH.js gzip 179 B 179 B ✓
framework-HASH.js gzip 42.1 kB 42.1 kB ✓
main-HASH.js gzip 27.9 kB 27.9 kB ✓
webpack-HASH.js gzip 1.44 kB 1.44 kB ✓
Overall change 71.7 kB 71.7 kB ✓
Legacy Client Bundles (polyfills)
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
polyfills-HASH.js gzip 31 kB 31 kB ✓
Overall change 31 kB 31 kB ✓
Client Pages
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set 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 2.56 kB 2.56 kB ✓
head-HASH.js gzip 342 B 342 B ✓
hooks-HASH.js gzip 911 B 911 B ✓
image-HASH.js gzip 5.05 kB 5.05 kB ✓
index-HASH.js gzip 256 B 256 B ✓
link-HASH.js gzip 2.28 kB 2.28 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 14.7 kB 14.7 kB ✓
Client Build Manifests
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
_buildManifest.js gzip 458 B 458 B ✓
Overall change 458 B 458 B ✓
Rendered Page Sizes
vercel/next.js canary ijjk/next.js update/image-optimizer-set Change
index.html gzip 533 B 533 B ✓
link.html gzip 547 B 547 B ✓
withRouter.html gzip 527 B 527 B ✓
Overall change 1.61 kB 1.61 kB ✓
Commit: 4b26474

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit fa5571a into vercel:canary Feb 11, 2022
@ijjk ijjk deleted the update/image-optimizer-set branch February 11, 2022 02:29
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 13, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@styfle styfle styfle approved these changes

@timneutkens timneutkens Awaiting requested review from timneutkens

@shuding shuding Awaiting requested review from shuding

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
created-by: Next.js team PRs by the Next.js team. type: next
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

"ENOENT: no such file or directory" - next.js crashes, related to image caching?
2 participants
@ijjk @styfle