nodejs / nodejs/node

fs module should support writing from Blob and web ReadableStream sources

Ouverte
#61,684 4 commentaires 0 réactions 0 personnes assignées Voir sur GitHub

Personne n'a encore pris cette issue.

feature request
Langage dominant
JavaScript
Étoiles
122k
Forks
37.3k
Merge moyen
4 j 2 h
PR mergées (30 j)
283

Description

What is the problem this feature will solve?

Currently, all Node.js fs module methods for writing data (such as fs.write, fs.createWriteStream) only accept Buffers or strings. There is no built-in support for writing data directly from Blob or web ReadableStream sources. This limits interoperability with web platform APIs and makes working with large files or streaming data @less seamless, especially when trying to move data efficiently from web contexts into the filesystem. Furthermore, Node.js provides fs.readableWebStream, but no corresponding fs.createWritableStream that would allow writing from web streams or Blobs directly.

What is the feature you are proposing to solve the problem?

Extend the Node.js fs module with the following capabilities:

  • Allow fs.write and related write methods to accept Blob objects as a valid input, making it possible to write the entirety of a Blob's contents to a file without manual conversion to Buffer.
  • Introduce fs.createWritableStream (web-compatible), which would be a direct counterpart to fs.readableWebStream and support writing from web ReadableStream sources to files.

This would improve ease-of-use when working with large binary/web platform data and make fs more aligned with modern web standards.

What alternatives have you considered?

Current workarounds involve manually converting Blobs and web streams into Buffers or converting web streams into node:streams

The only solution we have today is to use the fs.promise.writeFile(path, webStream) which luckily supports async iterable

with that in mind, the NodeJS document for...

... filehandle.appendFile(data[, options]) says it support:

data: <string> | <Buffer> | <TypedArray> | <DataView> | <AsyncIterable> | <Iterable> | <Stream>

it should also say

data: <string> | <Buffer> | <TypedArray> | <DataView> | <AsyncIterable> | <Iterable> | <Stream> | <ReadableStream>

or just

data: <string> | <Buffer> | <TypedArray> | <DataView> | <AsyncIterable> | <Iterable>

as stream's are async iterable

and i also do not thing it should say Buffer anymore... buffer is a typed array already... so it can just say:

data: <string> | <TypedArray> | <DataView> | <AsyncIterable> | <Iterable>

but this is just only off-topic


able to write Blob's would enable efficient native copy operations (like using openAsBlob(path) and writing directly to another file) without data passing through the JS runtime.

able to write blobs avoids extra conversions/allocations in JS, reduces memory footprint and GC pressure


the solution i'm looking for is something like:

blob = new Blob(['hello world'])
await filehandle.write(blob)

await blob.stream().pipeTo(fs.createWritableStream(dest))

// using fetch is becoming more popular, so a web writable stream is highly requested
await new Response('...').body.pipeTo(fs.createWritableStream(dest))

Guide de contribution

Ouvrir le guide de contribution

Par où commencer

  1. Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
  2. Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
  3. Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
  4. Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.

Piste de recherche

Lisez d’abord le comportement existant de fs.write, fs.promises.writeFile, fs.readableWebStream et filehandle.appendFile, puis comparez-le aux cas Blob et web ReadableStream de l’issue. Le travail est considéré comme terminé lorsque le périmètre pris en charge est défini d’un commun accord et que les API d’écriture demandées gèrent les cas d’utilisation Blob et web-stream indiqués.

Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.

Évaluation

Stack technique
javascript, nodejs
Domaine
operating-systems
Type d'issue
Fonctionnalité
Difficulté
5/5
Temps estimé
Plus d'une semaine
Activité
Calme
Clarté
Plutôt claire
Accessibilité débutants
42/100

Recevez les nouvelles issues par e-mail

Un résumé court des issues GitHub adaptées aux débutants.