Chrome DevTools Extensions has a silly problem where they block access
to load Resources from all protocols except [an allow
list](eb970fbc64/front_end/models/extensions/ExtensionServer.ts (L60)).
https://issues.chromium.org/issues/416196401
Even though these are `eval()` and not actually loaded from the network
they're blocked. They can really be any string. We just have to pick one
of:
```js
'http:', 'https:', 'file:', 'data:', 'chrome-extension:', 'about:'
```
That way React DevTools extensions can load this content to source map
them.
Webpack has the same issue with its `webpack://` and
`webpack-internal://` urls.
This resolves an outstanding issue where it was possible for debug info
and console logs to become out of order if they up blocked. E.g. by a
future reference or a client reference that hasn't loaded yet. Such as
if you console.log a client reference followed by one that doesn't. This
encodes the order similar to how the stream chunks work.
This also blocks the main chunk from resolving until the last debug info
has fully loaded, including future references and client references.
This also ensures that we could send some of that data in a different
stream, since then it can come out of order.
React Elements reference debug data (their stack and owner) in the debug
channel. If the debug channel isn't wired up this can block the client
from resolving.
We can infer that if there's no debug channel wired up and the reference
wasn't emitted before the element, then it's probably because it's in
the debug channel. So we can skip it.
This should also apply to debug chunks but they're not yet blocking
until #33665 lands.
This lets us pass a writable on the server side and readable on the
client side to send debug info through a separate channel so that it
doesn't interfere with the main payload as much. The main payload refers
to chunks defined in the debug info which means it's still blocked on it
though. This ensures that the debug data has loaded by the time the
value is rendered so that the next step can forward the data.
This will be a bit fragile to race conditions until #33665 lands.
Another follow up needed is the ability to skip the debug channel on the
receiving side. Right now it'll block forever if you don't provide one
since we're blocking on the debug data.
If we have the ability to lazy load Promise values, i.e. if we have a
debug channel, then we should always use it for Promises that aren't
already resolved and instrumented.
There's little downside to this since they're async anyway.
This also lets us avoid adding `.then()` listeners too early. E.g. if
adding the listener would have side-effect. This avoids covering up
"unhandled rejection" errors. Since if we listen to a promise eagerly,
including reject listeners, we'd have marked that Promise's rejection as
handled where as maybe it wouldn't have been otherwise.
In this mode we can also indefinitely wait for the Promise to resolve
instead of just waiting a microtask for it to resolve.
When a debug channel is available, we now allow objects to be lazily
requested though the debug channel and only then will the server send
it.
The client will actually eagerly ask for the next level of objects once
it parses its payload. That way those objects have likely loaded by the
time you actually expand that deep e.g. in the console repl. This is
needed since the console repl is synchronous when you ask it to invoke
getters.
Each level is lazily parsed which means that we don't parse the next
level even though we eagerly loaded it. We parse it once the getter is
invoked (in Chrome DevTools you have to click a little `(...)` to invoke
the getter). When the getter is invoked, the chunk is initialized and
parsed. This then causes the next level to be asked for through the
debug channel. Ensuring that if you expand one more level you can do so
synchronously.
Currently debug chunks are eagerly parsed, which means that if you have
things like server component props that are lazy they can end up being
immediately asked for, but I'm trying to move to make the debug chunks
lazy.
Stacked on #33718. Alternative to #33716.
The issue with flushing the Server Components track in its current form
is that we need to decide how long to wait before flushing whatever we
have. That's because the root's end time will be determined by the end
time of that last child.
However, if a child isn't actually used then we don't necessarily need
to include it in the Server Components track since it wasn't blocking
the initial render.
This waits for 100ms after the last pending chunk is resolved and if
nothing is invoking any more lazy initializers after that then we log
the Server Components track with the information we have at that point.
We also don't eagerly initialize any chunks that wasn't already
initialized so if nothing was rendered, then nothing will be logged.
This is somewhat an artifact of the current visualization. If we did
another transposed form we wouldn't necessarily need to wait until the
end and can log things as they're discovered.
When we have a debug channel open that can ask for more objects. That
doesn't close until all lazy objects have been explicitly asked for. If
you GC an object before the lazy references inside of it before asking
for or releasing the objects, then it'll never close.
This ensures that if there are no more PendingChunk and no more
ResolvedModelChunk then we can close the connection.
There's two sources of retaining the Response object. On one side we
have a handle to it from the stream coming from the server. On the other
side we have a handle to it from ResolvedModelChunk to ask for more data
when we lazily parse a model.
This PR makes a weak handle from the stream to the Response. However, it
keeps a strong reference alive whenever we're waiting on a pending chunk
because then the stream might be the root if the only listeners are the
callbacks passed to the promise and no references to the promise itself.
The pending chunks count can end up being zero even if we might get more
data because the references might be inside lazy chunks. In this case
the lazy chunks keeps the Response alive. When the lazy chunk gets
parsed it can find more chunks that then end up pending to keep the
response strongly alive until they resolve.
`react-stack-bottom-frame` -> `react_stack_bottom_frame`.
This survives `@babel/plugin-transform-function-name`, but now frames
will be displayed as `at Object.react_stack_bottom_frame (...)` in V8.
Checks that were relying on exact function name match were updated to
use either `.indexOf()` or `.includes()`
For backwards compatibility, both React DevTools and Flight Client will
look for both options. I am not so sure about the latter and if React
version is locked.
We generally treat these types of fields as optional on ReactDebugInfo
and should on ReactElement too.
That way we can consume prod payloads from third parties.
Stacked on #33666.
If we ever get a future reference to a cycle and that reference gets
eagerly parsed before the target has loaded then we can end up with a
cycle that never gets resolved. That's because our cycle resolution only
works if the cyclic future reference is created synchronously within the
parsing path of the child.
I haven't been able to construct a normal scenario where this would
break. So this doesn't fail any tests. However, I can construct it with
debug info since those are eagerly evaluated. It's also a prerequisite
if the debug data can come out of order, like if it's on a different
stream.
The fix here is to make all the internal dependencies in the "listener"
list into introspectable objects instead of closures. That way we can
traverse the list of dependencies of a blocked reference to see if it
ends up in a cycle and therefore skip the reference.
It would be nice to address this once and for all to be more resilient
to server changes, but I'm not sure if it's worth this complexity and
the extra CPU cost of tracing the dependencies. Especially if it's just
for debug data.
closes#32316fixesvercel/next.js#72104
---------
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Liebau <mail@hendrik-liebau.de>
This writes all debug info to a separate priority queue. In the future
I'll put this on a different channel.
Ideally I think we'd put it in the bottom of the stream but because it
actually blocks the elements from resolving anyway it ends up being
better to put them ahead. At least for now.
When we have two separate channels it's not possible to rely on the
order for consistency Even then we might write to that queue first for
this reason. We can't rely on it though. Which will show up like things
turning into Lazy instead of Element similar to how outlining can.
<img width="926" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-25 at 1 02 14 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1877d13d-5259-4cc4-8f48-12981e3073fe"
/>
The I/O entry doesn't show as aborted in the Server Request track
because technically it wasn't. The end time is just made up. It's still
going. It's not aborted until the abort signal propagates and if we do
get that signal wired up before it emits, it instead would show up as
rejected.
---------
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Liebau <mail@hendrik-liebau.de>
This is using the same trick as #30798 but for runtime code too. It's
essential zero cost.
This lets us include a source location for parent stacks of Server
Components when it has an owned child's location. Either from JSX or
I/O.
Ironically, a Component that throws an error will likely itself not get
the stack because it won't have any JSX rendered yet.
This adds plumbing for opening a stream from the Flight Client to the
Flight Server so it can ask for more data on-demand. In this mode, the
Flight Server keeps the connection open as long as the client is still
alive and there's more objects to load. It retains any depth limited
objects so that they can be asked for later. In this first PR it just
releases the object when it's discovered on the server and doesn't
actually lazy load it yet. That's coming in a follow up.
This strategy is built on the model that each request has its own
channel for this. Instead of some global registry. That ensures that
referential identity is preserved within a Request and the Request can
refer to previously written objects by reference.
The fixture implements a WebSocket per request but it doesn't have to be
done that way. It can be multiplexed through an existing WebSocket for
example. The current protocol is just a Readable(Stream) on the server
and WritableStream on the client. It could even be sent through a HTTP
request body if browsers implemented full duplex (which they don't).
This PR only implements the direction of messages from Client to Server.
However, I also plan on adding Debug Channel in the other direction to
allow debug info (optionally) be sent from Server to Client through this
channel instead of through the main RSC request. So the `debugChannel`
option will be able to take writable or readable or both.
---------
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Liebau <mail@hendrik-liebau.de>
This frees some memory that will be even more important in a follow up.
Currently, all `ReactPromise` instances hold onto their original
`Response`. The `Response` holds onto all objects that were in that
response since they're needed in case the parsed content ends up
referring to an existing object. If everything you retain are plain
objects then that's fine and the `Response` gets GC:ed, but if you're
retaining a `Promise` itself then it holds onto the whole `Response`.
The only thing that needs this reference at all is a
`ResolvedModelChunk` since it will lazily initialize e.g. by calling
`.then` on itself and so we need to know where to find any sibling
chunks it may refer to. However, we can just store the `Response` on the
`reason` field for this particular state.
That way when all lazy values are touched and initialized the `Response`
is freed. We also free up some memory by getting rid of the extra field.
Stacked on #33588, #33589 and #33590.
This lets us automatically show the resolved value in the UI.
<img width="863" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-22 at 12 54 41 AM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a66d1d5e-0513-4767-910c-5c7169fc2df4"
/>
We can also show rejected I/O that may or may not have been handled with
the error message.
<img width="838" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-22 at 12 55 06 AM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e0a8b6ae-08ba-46d8-8cc5-efb60956a1d1"
/>
To get this working we need to keep the Promise around for longer so
that we can access it once we want to emit an async sequence. I do this
by storing the WeakRefs but to ensure that the Promise doesn't get
garbage collected, I keep a WeakMap of Promise to the Promise that it
depended on. This lets the VM still clean up any Promise chains that
have leaves that are cleaned up. So this makes Promises live until the
last Promise downstream is done. At that point we can go back up the
chain to read the values out of them.
Additionally, to get the best possible value we don't want to get a
Promise that's used by internals of a third-party function. We want the
value that the first party gets to observe. To do this I had to change
the logic for which "await" to use, to be the one that is the first
await that happened in user space. It's not enough that the await has
any first party at all on the stack - it has to be the very first frame.
This is a little sketchy because it relies on the `.then()` call or
`await` call not having any third party wrappers. But it gives the best
object since it hides all the internals. For example when you call
`fetch()` we now log that actual `Response` object.
This adds better support for serializing class instances as Debug
values.
It adds a new marker on the object `{ "": "$P...", ... }` which
indicates which constructor's prototype to use for this object's
prototype. It doesn't encode arbitrary prototypes and it doesn't encode
any of the properties on the prototype. It might get some of the
properties from the prototype by virtue of `toString` on a `class`
constructor will include the whole class's body.
This will ensure that the instance gets the right name in logs.
Additionally, this now also invokes getters if they're enumerable on the
prototype. This lets us reify values that can only be read from native
classes.
---------
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Liebau <mail@hendrik-liebau.de>
We already support serializing the values of instrumented Promises as
debug values such as in console logs. However, we don't support plain
native promises.
This waits a microtask to see if we can read the value within a
microtask and if so emit it. This is so that we can still close the
connection.
Otherwise, we emit a "halted" row into its row id which replaces the old
"Infinite Promise" reference.
We could potentially wait until the end of the render before cancelling
so that if it resolves before we exit we can still include its value but
that would require a bit more work. Ideally we'd have a way to get these
lazily later anyway.
It turns out this was being compiled to a `_defineProperty` helper by
Babel or Closure. We're supposed to have it error the build when we use
features like this that might get compiled.
We should stick to simple ES5 features.
Stacked on #33539.
Stores dedupes of `renderConsoleValue` in a separate set. This allows us
to dedupe objects safely since we can't write objects using this
algorithm if they might also be referenced by the "real" serialization.
Also renamed it to `renderDebugModel` since it's not just for console
anymore.
Previously you weren't guaranteed to have only advancing time entries,
you could jump back in time, but now it omits unnecessary duplicates and
clamps automatically if you emit a previous time entry to enforce
forwards order only.
The reason I didn't do this originally is because `await` can jump in
the order because we're trying to encode a graph into a flat timeline
for simplicity of the protocol and consumers.
```js
async function a() {
await fetch1();
await fetch2();
}
async function b() {
await fetch3();
}
async function foo() {
const p = a();
await b();
return p;
}
```
This can effectively create two parallel sequences:
```
--1.................----2.......--
------3......---------------------
```
This can now be flattened to either:
```
--1.................3---2.......--
```
Or:
```
------3......1......----2.......--
```
Depending on which one we visit first. Regardless, information is lost.
I'd say that the second one is worse encoding of this scenario because
it pretends that we weren't waiting for part of the timespan that we
were. To solve this I think we should probably make `emitAsyncSequence`
create a temporary flat list and then sort it by start time before
emitting.
Although we weren't actually blocked since there was some CPU time that
was able to proceed to get to 3. So maybe the second one is actually
better. If we wanted that consistently we'd have to figure out what the
intersection was.
---------
Co-authored-by: Hendrik Liebau <mail@hendrik-liebau.de>
I noticed that the ThirdPartyComponent in the fixture was showing the
wrong stack and the `"use third-party"` is in the wrong location.
<img width="628" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-06 at 11 22 11 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f0013380-d79e-4765-b371-87fd61b3056b"
/>
When creating the initial JSX inside the third party server, we should
make sure that it has no owner. In a real cross-server environment you
get this by default by just executing in different context. But since
the fixture example is inside the same AsyncLocalStorage as the parent
it already has an owner which gets transferred. So we should make sure
that were we create the JSX has no owner to simulate this.
When we then parse a null owner on the receiving side, we replace its
owner/stack with the owner/stack of the call to `createFrom...` to
connect them. This worked fine with only two environments. The bug was
that when we did this and then transferred the result to a third
environment we took the original parsed stack trace. We should instead
parse a new one from the replaced stack in the current environment.
The second bug was that the `"use third-party"` badge ends up in the
wrong place when we do this kind of thing. Because the stack of the
thing entering the new environment is the call to `createFrom...` which
is in the old environment even though the component itself executes in
the new environment. So to see if there's a change we should be
comparing the current environment of the task to the owner's environment
instead of the next environment after the task.
After:
<img width="494" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-07 at 1 13 28 AM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e2e870ba-f125-4526-a853-bd29f164cf09"
/>
Stacked on #33403.
When a Promise is coming from React such as when it's passed from
another environment, we should forward the debug information from that
environment. We already do that when rendered as a child.
This makes it possible to also `await promise` and have the information
from that instrumented promise carry through to the next render.
This is a bit tricky because the current protocol is that we have to
read it from the Promise after it resolves so it has time to be assigned
to the promise. `async_hooks` doesn't pass us the instance (even though
it has it) when it gets resolved so we need to keep it around. However,
we have to be very careful because if we get this wrong it'll cause a
memory leak since we retain things by `asyncId` and then manually listen
for `destroy()` which can only be called once a Promise is GC:ed, which
it can't be if we retain it. We have to therefore use a `WeakRef` in
case it never resolves, and then read the `_debugInfo` when it resolves.
We could maybe install a setter or something instead but that's also
heavy.
The other issues is that we don't use native Promises in
ReactFlightClient so our instrumented promises aren't picked up by the
`async_hooks` implementation and so we never get a handle to our
thenable instance. To solve this we can create a native wrapper only in
DEV.
Stacked on #33402.
There's a bug in Chrome Performance tracking which uses the enclosing
line/column instead of the callsite in stacks.
For our fake eval:ed functions that represents functions on the server,
we can position the enclosing function body at the position of the
callsite to simulate getting the right line.
Unfortunately, that doesn't give us exactly the right callsite when it's
used for other purposes that uses the callsite like console logs and
error reporting and stacks inside breakpoints. So I don't think we want
to always do this.
For ReactAsyncInfo/ReactIOInfo, the only thing we're going to use the
fake task for is the Performance tracking, so it doesn't have any
downsides until Chrome fixes the bug and we'd have to revert it.
Therefore this PR uses that techniques only for those entries.
We could do this for Server Components too but we're going to use those
for other things too like console logs. I don't think it's worth
duplicating the Task objects. That would also make it inconsistent with
Client Components.
For Client Components, we could in theory also generate fake evals but
that would be way slower since there's so many of them and currently we
rely on the native implementation for those. So doesn't seem worth
fixing.
But since we can at least fix it for RSC I/O/awaits we can do this hack.
Stacked on #33400.
<img width="1261" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-01 at 10 27 47 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a5a73ee2-49e0-4851-84ac-e0df6032efb5"
/>
This is emitted with the start/end time and stack of the "await". Which
may be different than the thing that started the I/O.
These awaits aren't quite as simple as just every await since you can
start a sequence in parallel there can actually be multiple overlapping
awaits and there can be CPU work interleaved with the await on the same
component.
```js
function getData() {
await fetch(...);
await fetch(...);
}
const promise = getData();
doWork();
await promise;
```
This has two "I/O" awaits but those are actually happening in parallel
with `doWork()`.
Since these also could have started before we started rendering this
sequence (e.g. a component) we have to clamp it so that we don't
consider awaits that start before the component.
What we're conceptually trying to convey is the time this component was
blocked due to that I/O resource. Whether it's blocked from completing
the last result or if it's blocked from issuing a waterfall request.
Stacked on #33395.
This lets us keep track of which environment this was fetched and
awaited.
Currently the IO and await is in the same environment. It's just kept
when forwarded. Once we support forwarding information from a Promise
fetched from another environment and awaited in this environment then
the await can end up being in a different environment.
There's a question of when the await is inside Flight itself such as
when you return a promise fetched from another environment whether that
should mean that the await is in the current environment. I don't think
so since the original stack trace is the best stack trace. It's only if
you `await` it in user space in this environment first that this might
happen and even then it should only be considered if there wasn't a
better await earlier or if reading from the other environment was itself
I/O.
The timing of *when* we read `environmentName()` is a little interesting
here too.
Stacked on #33394.
This lets us create async stack traces to the owner that was in context
when the I/O was started or awaited.
<img width="615" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-01 at 12 31 52 AM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6ff5a146-33d6-4a4b-84af-1b57e73047d4"
/>
This owner might not be the immediate closest parent where the I/O was
awaited.
Stacked on #33392.
This adds another track to the Performance Track called `"Server
Requests"`.
<img width="1015" alt="Screenshot 2025-06-01 at 12 02 14 AM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c4d164c4-cfdf-4e14-9a87-3f011f65fd20"
/>
This logs the flat list of I/O awaited on by Server Components. There
will be other views that are more focused on what data blocks a specific
Component or Suspense boundary but this is just the list of all the I/O
basically so you can get an overview of those waterfalls without the
noise of all the Component trees and rendering. It's similar to what the
"Network" track is on the client.
I've been going back and forth on what to call this track but I went
with `"Server Requests"` for now. The idea is that the name should
communicate that this is something that happens on the server and is a
pairing with the `"Server Components"` track. Although we don't use that
feature, since it's missing granularity, it's also similar to "Server
Timings".
Stacked on #33390.
The stack trace doesn't include the thing you called when calling into
ignore listed content. We consider the ignore listed content
conceptually the abstraction that you called that's interesting.
This extracts the name of the first ignore listed function that was
called from user space. For example `"fetch"`. So we can know what kind
of request this is.
This could be enhanced and tweaked with heuristics in the future. For
example, when you create a Promise yourself and call I/O inside of it
like my `delay` examples, then we use that Promise as the I/O node but
its stack doesn't have the actual I/O performed. It might be better to
use the inner I/O node in that case. E.g. `setTimeout`. Currently I pick
the name from the first party code instead - in my example `delay`.
Another case that could be improved is the case where your whole
component is third-party. In that case we still log the I/O but it has
no context about what kind of I/O since the whole stack is ignored it
just gets the component name for example. We could for example look at
the first name that is in a different package than the package name of
the ignored listed component. So if
`node_modules/my-component-library/index.js` calls into
`node_modules/mysql/connection.js` then we could use the name from the
inner.
Stacked on #33388.
This encodes the I/O entries as their own row type (`"J"`). This makes
it possible to parse them directly without first parsing the debug info
for each component. E.g. if you're just interested in logging the I/O
without all the places it was awaited.
This is not strictly necessary since the debug info is also readily
available without parsing the actual trees. (That's how the Server
Components Performance Track works.) However, we might want to exclude
this information in profiling builds while retaining some limited form
of I/O tracking.
It also allows for logging side-effects that are not awaited if we
wanted to.
Follow up to #33136.
This clarifies in the types where the conversion happens from a CallSite
which we use to simulate getting the enclosing line/col to a
FunctionLocation which doesn't represent a CallSite but actually just
the function which only has an enclosing line/col.
Stacked on #33135.
This encodes the line/column of the enclosing function as part of the
stack traces. When that information is available.
I adjusted the fake function code generation so that the beginning of
the arrow function aligns with these as much as possible.
This ensures that when the browser tries to look up the line/column of
the enclosing function, such as for getting the function name, it gets
the right one. If we can't get the enclosing line/column, then we encode
it at the beginning of the file. This is likely to get a miss in the
source map identifiers, which means that the function name gets
extracted from the runtime name instead which is better.
Another thing where this is used is the in the Performance Track.
Ideally that would be fixed by
https://issues.chromium.org/u/1/issues/415968771 but the enclosing
information is useful for other things like the function name resolution
anyway.
We can also use this for the "View source for this element" in React
DevTools.
This is used to register Server References that exist in the current
environment but also exists in the server it might call into. Such as a
remote server.
If the value comes from the remote server in the first place then this
is called automatically to ensure that you can pass a reference back to
where it came from - even if the `serverModuleMap` option is used. This
was already the case when `serverModuleMap` wasn't passed. This is how
you can pass server references back to the server. However, when we
added `serverModuleMap` that pass was skipped because we were getting
real functions instead of proxies.
For functions that wasn't yet passed from the remote server to the
current server, we can register them eagerly just like we do for
`import('/server').registerServerReference()`. You can now also do this
with `import('/client').registerServerReference()`. We could make them
shared so you only have to do this once but it might not be possible to
pass to the remote server and the remote server might not even be the
same RSC renderer. Therefore I split them. It's up to the compiler
whether it should do that or not. It has to know that any function you
might call might be able to receive it. This is currently global to a
specific RSC renderer.
Typed errors is not a feature that Flight currently supports. However,
for presentation purposes, serializing a custom error name is something
we could support today.
With this PR, we're now transporting custom error names through the
server-client boundary, so that they are available in the client e.g.
for console replaying. One example where this can be useful is when you
want to print debug information while leveraging the fact that
`console.warn` displays the error stack, including handling of hiding
and source mapping stack frames. In this case you may want to show
`Warning: ...` or `Debug: ...` instead of `Error: ...`.
In prod mode, we still transport an obfuscated error that uses the
default `Error` name, to not leak any sensitive information from the
server to the client. This also means that you must not rely on the
error name to discriminate errors, e.g. when handling them in an error
boundary.
This is similar to #31876 but for Server Components.
It marks them as errored and puts the error message in the Summary
properties.
<img width="1511" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-20 at 5 05 35 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/92f11e42-0e23-41c7-bfd4-09effb25e024"
/>
This only looks at the current chunk for rejections. That means that
there might still be promises deeper that rejected but it's only the
immediate return value of the Server Component that's considered a
rejection of the component itself.
Stacked on #31737.
<img width="987" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-11 at 8 41 15 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/438379a9-0138-4d02-a53a-419402839558"
/>
When mixing environments (like "use cache" or third party RSC) it's
useful to color and badge those components differently to differentiate.
I'm not putting them in separate tracks because when they do actually
execute, like cache misses or third party RSCs, they behave like they're
part of the same tree.
Stacked on #31736.
<img width="1223" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-11 at 8 21 12 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a7cbc04b-c831-476b-aa2f-baddec9461c9"
/>
This emits a placeholder when we're deduping a component. This starts
when the parent's self time ends, where we would've started rendering
this component if it wasn't already started. The end time is when the
actual render ends since the parent is also blocked by it.
Stacked on #31735.
This ensures that Server Components Track comes first. Since it's
typically rendered first on the server for initial load and then flows
into scheduler and client components work. Also puts it closer to the
Network and further away from "Main" JS.
<img width="769" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-11 at 5 31 41 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7198db0f-075e-4a78-8ea4-3bfbf06727cb"
/>
Same trick as in #31615.
Stacked on https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/31729
<img width="1436" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-11 at 3 36 41 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a201913-0076-4bbf-be18-8f1df6c58313"
/>
The Server Components visualization is currently a tree flame graph
where parent spans the child. This makes it equivalent to the Client
Components visualization.
However, since Server Components can be async and therefore parallel, we
need to do something when two children are executed in parallel. This PR
bumps parallel children into a separate track and then within that track
if that child has more children it can grow within that track.
I currently just cut off more than 10 parallel tracks.
Synchronous Server Components are still in sequence but it's unlikely
because even a simple microtasky Async Component is still parallel.
<img width="959" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-11 at 4 31 17 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5ad6a7f8-7fa0-46dc-af51-78caf9849176"
/>
I think this is probably not a very useful visualization for Server
Components but we can try it out.
I'm also going to try a different visualization where parent-child
relationship is horizontal and parallel vertical instead, but it might
not be possible to make that line up in this tool. It makes it a little
harder to see how much different components (including their children)
impact the overall tree. If that's the only visualization it's also
confusing why it's different dimensions than the Client Component
version.
<img width="966" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-10 at 10 49 19 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/27a21bdf-86b9-4203-893b-89523e698138">
This emits a tree view visualization of the timing information for each
Server Component provided in the RSC payload.
The unique thing about this visualization is that the end time of each
Server Component spans the end of the last child. Now what is
conceptually a blocking child is kind of undefined in RSC. E.g. if
you're not using a Promise on the client, or if it is wrapped in
Suspense, is it really blocking the parent?
Here I reconstruct parent-child relationship by which chunks reference
other chunks. A child can belong to more than one parent like when we
dedupe the result of a Server Component.
Then I wait until the whole RSC payload has streamed in, and then I
traverse the tree collecting the end time from children as I go and emit
the `performance.measure()` calls on the way up.
There's more work for this visualization in follow ups but this is the
basics. For example, since the Server Component time span includes async
work it's possible for siblings to execute their span in parallel (Foo
and Bar in the screenshot are parallel siblings). To deal with this we
need to spawn parallel work into separate tracks. Each one can be deep
due to large trees. This can makes this type of visualization unwieldy
when you have a lot of parallelism. Therefore I also plan another
flatter Timeline visualization in a follow up.
Stacked on #31715.
This adds profiling data for Server Components to the RSC stream (but
doesn't yet use it for anything). This is on behind
`enableProfilerTimer` which is on for Dev and Profiling builds. However,
for now there's no Profiling build of Flight so in practice only in DEV.
It's gated on `enableComponentPerformanceTrack` which is experimental
only for now.
We first emit a timeOrigin in the beginning of the stream. This provides
us a relative time to emit timestamps against for cross environment
transfer so that we can log it in terms of absolute times. Using this as
a separate field allows the actual relative timestamps to be a bit more
compact representation and preserves floating point precision.
We emit a timestamp before emitting a Server Component which represents
the start time of the Server Component. The end time is either when the
next Server Component starts or when we finish the task.
We omit the end time for simple tasks that are outlined without Server
Components.
By encoding this as part of the debugInfo stream, this information can
be forwarded between Server to Server RSC.
