You can bundle it all into one file and it's not single threaded anymore. There's this thing called worker_threads.
But yes there are downsides. But the biggest ones you brought up are not true.
You can bundle it all into one file and it's not single threaded anymore. There's this thing called worker_threads.
But yes there are downsides. But the biggest ones you brought up are not true.
> You can bundle it all into one file
This is the first I'm hearing of this, and a quick Google search found me a bunch of conflicting "methods" just within the NestJS ecosystem, and no clear indication of which one actually works.
... and of course I get errors with both of those that I don't get with a plain "nest build". (The error also helpfully specifies only the directory in the source, not the filename! Wtf?)Is this because NestJS is a "squishy scripting system" designed for hobbyists that edit API controller scripts live on the production server, and this is the first time that it has been actually built, or... is it because webpack has some obscure compatibility issue with a package?
... or is it because I have the "wrong" hieroglyphics in some Typescript config file?
Who knows!
> There's this thing called worker_threads.
Which are not even remotely the same as the .NET runtime and ASP.NET, which have a symmetric threading model where requests are handled on a thread pool by default. Node.js allows "special" computations to be offloaded to workers, but not HTTP requests. These worker threads can only communicate with the main thread through byte buffers!
In .NET land I can simply use a concurrent dictionary or any similar shared data structure... and it just works. Heck, I can process a single IEnumerable, list, or array using parallel workers trivially.
If you read my comment I said there are downsides:
"But yes there are downsides. But the biggest ones you brought up are not true."
My point is.. what you said is NOT true. And even after you're reply, it's still not true. You brought up some downsides in your subsequent reply... but again, your initial reply wasn't true.
That's all. I acknowledge the downsides, but my point remains the same.