Initial design, prerequisites

[mcollina]

We should verify there are all the pieces in Astro and Fastify to make this possible, and see how they can interact.

Something that would work extremely well from a Fastify perspective would be something like:

import fp from 'fastify-plugin'
import fastifyStatic from '@fastify/static'

export default async function (app, opts) {
  const { routes, dir } = await buildAstro(opts)
  
  // dynamic routes
  for (const route of routes) {
    app.get(route.path, (req, reply) => {
      const { result, statusCode, headers } = await route.serve()
      reply.code(statusCode).headers(headers)
      return result
    })
  }

  app.register(fastifyStatic, { dir, wildcard: false })
}

This approach would be extremely good from a production standpoint. However I'm not exactly sure how to fit an HMR model in here.

[matthewp]

This sounds great! Thanks a lot, having an API idea really helps me visualize what this all may look like. A lot of the pieces suggested here already exist, just not in the nice API forms being shown.

So I can either do some work on cleaning that API, and probably having something like a beta/preview npm tag so it can be used, or we could just import the internals and use those. I'll have to take a look and see what's more plausible.

I don't think the dev standpoint would be much harder. I actually think production might be slightly harder because I don't think you'll want to run the build when your production server starts up, instead you'd want to run the build in a CI, save the route information to a file somewhere, and then pull that in and use it. I'll think a bit more on this.

I wouldn't expect us to be able to get both development and production done on a stream, but we could try and see how far we get.

[mcollina]

I think the best approach would be to develop on top of the internals, and then extract public APIs from it.

[matthewp]

Ok, this is the version using internals:

//import fp from 'fastify-plugin'
import fastifyStatic from '@fastify/static';
import { fileURLToPath } from 'node:url';
import { createContainer } from './node_modules/astro/dist/core/dev/index.js';
import { createViteLoader } from './node_modules/astro/dist/core/module-loader/index.js';
import { createRouteManifest } from './node_modules/astro/dist/core/routing/index.js';
import { createDevelopmentEnvironment, renderPage, preload } from './node_modules/astro/dist/core/render/dev/index.js';

export default async function (app, { root }) {
  const container = await createContainer({ root });
  const loader = createViteLoader(container.viteServer);
  const manifest = createRouteManifest({ settings: container.settings }, container.logging);
  const env = createDevelopmentEnvironment(container.settings, container.logging, loader);
  
  // dynamic routes
  for (const route of manifest.routes) {
    app.get(route.route, async (req, reply) => {
      const filePath = new URL(route.component, root);
      const request = new Request(`http://localhost${req.url}`, {
        method: req.method
      });
      const response = await renderPage({
        env,
        filePath,
        preload: await preload({ env, filePath }),
        pathname: req.url,
        request,
        route
      });

      reply.code(response.status).headers(Object.fromEntries(response.headers.entries()));

      const body = await response.text();
      reply.send(body);
    })
  }

  app.register(fastifyStatic, {
    root: fileURLToPath(container.settings.config.publicDir),
    wildcard: false
  })
}

As you can see, this uses a lot of internals! And most of these things are not part of our "exports" map, so it can't be imported the normal way.

Luckily for production we have a higher-level abstraction. A class called App which is the thing that my astro-fastify adapter (and all of our production adapters) use.

I think it makes sense to create a subclass of that for development mode purposes. I'll work on that and then see how it cleans up this code and share it with you.

[matthewp]

One thing, I couldn't get streaming to work. Astro uses the whatwg request and response objects. I think for streaming I'll need to convert the web stream to a node:stream, is that right?

edit: I think Readable.fromWeb(response.body) should work.

[mcollina]

This makes 100% total sense. How do you see us plugging into this?

We can:

1. make me do a PR to Astro and work together on that (code lives in your repo, you don't have anything else to expose)
2. we add some of those to public astro APIs to get this flow working.

In the case of 2, there is no real need to @fastify/static if you have a way to serve files from within astro, or you can just expose the publicDir as a path via a decorator, telling people to serve it themselves.

[matthewp]

I think (2). We have external APIs for adapters and dev mode could work very similarly. I've started a PR here: withastro/astro#6231

Note that this PR is a draft and might take some time to finish up and get approval. But I've created a preview release tag we can play around with: astro@next--devapp

I'm working on an updated version of fastify-astro that uses this API. It should be good enough for the stream.

[mcollina]

awesome!

[matthewp]

Here's a version that uses the new DevApp I'm proposing:

import { DevApp } from 'astro/app/dev';

export default async function (fastify, { root }) {
  const app = new DevApp({ root });
  await app.load();
  
  // dynamic routes
  for (const route of app.routes) {
    fastify.get(route.route, async (req, reply) => {
      const request = new Request(`http://localhost${req.url}`, {
        method: req.method
      });

      const response = await app.render(request);      

      reply.code(response.status).headers(Object.fromEntries(response.headers.entries()));
      for await (const chunk of response.body) {
        reply.raw.write(chunk);
      }
      reply.raw.end();
    })
  }
}

This contains some bugs / incompletions we can tackle on the stream.

Here's the branches I have:

• https://github.com/matthewp/fastify-astro/tree/using-devapp The above public api version
• https://github.com/matthewp/fastify-astro/tree/using-internals Using internals, just in case we run into a blocker with the DevApp version.

[matthewp]

@ematipico and I have been talking about picking back up this idea!

[mcollina]

How can I help? This would be amazing!

[ematipico]

I am not very familiar with the fastify APIs/plugin system. I know that fastify now has an official @fastify/vite plugin for vite. Can Astro, as fastify plugin, use this plugin under the hoods to spin a vite instance and eventually render a route?

[mcollina]

Astro assumes to be in control of the http server, same as Fastify. Currently you can wrap a Fastify instance inside an Astro instance, while I would like to do the opposite.

@fastify/vite can help in the sense that it provides a way to hook Vite up. Can Astro be spin up as a config of Vite?

[PierBover]

Can Astro, as fastify plugin, use this plugin under the hoods to spin a vite instance and eventually render a route?

This should only happen during dev, no?

Vite should not be used in production. In part because Vite can build the Node modules for rendering in the server (and obviously the client stuff too) but also because of this on-going issue with memory:

vitejs/vite#2433

[mcollina]

I think Vite is needed in production to do SSR.

[PierBover]

I think Vite is needed in production to do SSR.

It's not needed. When bulding, Vite creates the Node modules that will do the SSR.

I made this demo with Fastify and Svelte. This file is what does the Vite magic of loading .svelte files for SSR and when building it's converted into a regular Node file that imports Node modules without needing Vite.

Edit:

Here are the Vite docs for building for SSR.

https://vitejs.dev/guide/ssr#building-for-production

I'm sure @matthewp knows all about this though!

[ematipico]

Can Astro, as fastify plugin, use this plugin under the hoods to spin a vite instance and eventually render a route?

This should only happen during dev, no?

Yes, exactly, this would happen only in dev.

Vite should not be used in production. In part because Vite can build the Node modules for rendering in the server (and obviously the client stuff too) but also because of this on-going issue with memory:

vitejs/vite#2433

Agree. In production, Astro doesn't need to use Vite, although it requires a build step (using Vite) to compile everything to JS (for SSG or SSR).

[mcollina]

What's the interface of Astro in production?

[matthewp]

You have to write an adapter which is basically just a way to customize the built module's exports so that it can be used in production. Here's some pseudo-code:

adapter.js

import { NodeApp } from 'astro/app/node';

export function createExports(manifest, options) {
  const app = new NodeApp(manifest);
  return {
    app
  }
}

which will produce something like this:

dist/server/entry.mjs

const _exports = createExports(manifest);

export const app = _exports.app;

Which you can then use like so:

import { app } from './dist/server/entry.mjs';

const response = app.render(request);
// request can be a http.IncomingMessage or a whatwg Request
// response is a whatwg Response

---

Note that this example is exposing the NodeApp instance but an adapter can define whatever exports it wants to. This is designed this way for hosts that expect certain module exports (for example AWS Lambda expects a function named handler.

[mcollina]

This might work to integrate. Will take a look and see if we can have a prod experience.

[matthewp]

@ematipico For dev-mode we can use this to prevent Vite from starting its dev server: https://vitejs.dev/guide/ssr.html#setting-up-the-dev-server

[ematipico]

@ematipico For dev-mode we can use this to prevent Vite from starting its dev server: vitejs.dev/guide/ssr.html#setting-up-the-dev-server

Oh, that's neat! That should work very well for us

[mcollina]

Is there a way to check if a route is served by Astro?

[ematipico]

Yes, the class NodeApp exposes a public method called match that returns true if it knows the route. And you call like this: app.match('/blog')

[matthewp]

I assume @mcollina wants to define all the routes up front, right? We can likely expose that information in some way.

[mcollina]

If there is a routes table available that would be fantastic.
I can likely make do with the app.match() at the cost of a bit of overhead.

[rmcarias]

Thank you @matthewp and @mcollina for this update. This will be amazing to have (and am itching to use it when ready) as part of the Fastify suite!

[patheticGeek]

Any updates on this so far? seems like this has not been worked on for a while

[ematipico]

This week, we will release the Container API as experimental. I think this API is going to be very useful for Fastify, eventually.

[mcollina]

@matthewp @ematipico are you up for a pairing session where we try to assemble this module once that's release? Would be great to do a stream on this.