Conversation
…g an experimental config option
nextjs-bot
added
created-by: Turbopack team
Member
Author
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
Collaborator
Failing test suitesCommit: 7836721 | About building and testing Next.js |
| webpackBuildWorker: z.boolean().optional(), | ||
| webpackMemoryOptimizations: z.boolean().optional(), | ||
| turbopackMemoryLimit: z.number().optional(), | ||
| turbopackNodeBackend: z.enum(['workerThreads', 'childProcesses']).optional(), |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe turbopackEscmascriptBackend? turbopackPluginRuntimeStrategy?
if the next process is running in bun then we would use bun worker threads.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that maybe we need to change the crate name to something else like turbopack_loader? thenTurbopackLoaderBackend will be better.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah fair, hello scope creep 😏
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Too late, I'm doing turbopackPluginRuntimeStrategy 😆
Comment on lines
+30
to
+38
| pub use backend::{CreatePoolFuture, CreatePoolOptions, NodeBackend}; | ||
| #[cfg(feature = "process_pool")] | ||
| pub fn child_process_backend() -> Vc<Box<dyn NodeBackend>> { | ||
| Vc::upcast(process_pool::ChildProcessesBackend.cell()) | ||
| } | ||
| #[cfg(feature = "worker_pool")] | ||
| pub fn worker_threads_backend() -> Vc<Box<dyn NodeBackend>> { | ||
| Vc::upcast(worker_pool::WorkerThreadsBackend.cell()) | ||
| } |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this would be the perfect place to prewarm. of course we would need a chunking context too but perhaps we could build it?
future work
lukesandberg
approved these changes
Feb 27, 2026
Merging this PR will improve performance by 3.26%
Performance Changes
Comparing 
Footnotes
|
Collaborator
Stats from current PR✅ No significant changes detected📊 All Metrics📖 Metrics GlossaryDev Server Metrics:
Build Metrics:
Change Thresholds:
⚡ Dev Server
📦 Dev Server (Webpack) (Legacy)📦 Dev Server (Webpack)
⚡ Production Builds
📦 Production Builds (Webpack) (Legacy)📦 Production Builds (Webpack)
📦 Bundle SizesBundle Sizes⚡ TurbopackClient Main Bundles: **401 kB** → **401 kB** ✅ -23 B80 files with content-based hashes (individual files not comparable between builds) Server Middleware
Build DetailsBuild Manifests
📦 WebpackClient Main Bundles
Polyfills
Pages
Server Edge SSR
Middleware
Build DetailsBuild Manifests
Build Cache
🔄 Shared (bundler-independent)Runtimes
📝 Changed Files (1 file)Files with changes:
View diffsserver.runtime.prod.jsDiff too large to display 📎 Tarball URL |
sokra
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2026
Member
Author
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-up to #86266
This was mostly LLM-generated, but it's just moving things around and threading through a config option.
We'd like to be able to turn this on/off with an experimental config option:
- Fixes issues where RA thinks a bunch of code is dead.
- Lets us isolate potential issues to the worker thread implementation.
- Provides an escape hatch for users in case there are issues.
- Better fits the cargo "additive feature" model.