Why pnpm Replaces npm and yarn #Node.js

For dependency management in JavaScript projects, there are three popular choices: Yarn, npm (Node Package Manager), and pnpm. Each of these package managers has its own characteristics and advantages, but let’s consider why pnpm may replace these.

Main Features of pnpm

• Speed and Efficiency: pnpm uses hard links and symbolic links to save disk space and speed up package installation and updates. This allows efficient management of dependencies shared across multiple projects.
• Security: pnpm uses a stronger algorithm (SHA-512) to verify package integrity and has resistance to brute force attacks and collisions. Also, to restrict access and modification between packages, it creates a separate node_modules folder for each package and links using symbolic links.
• Performance: pnpm is significantly faster than Yarn and npm in installing and updating dependencies. This is because using hard links from a global store eliminates the need to copy packages to each project.

Why pnpm Replaces npm and Yarn

• Performance and Disk Efficiency: pnpm is 3 times faster than Yarn and npm in package installation and updates, and uses disk space more efficiently. This is because pnpm uses hard links from a global store and doesn’t need to copy packages to each project.
• Security: pnpm uses a stronger algorithm to verify package integrity and has resistance to brute force attacks and collisions. Also, to restrict access and modification between packages, it creates a separate node_modules folder for each package and links using symbolic links.
• Compatibility and Easy Migration: pnpm is compatible with npm and can reuse package.json and node_modules, so migration from npm to pnpm is relatively easy.

Comparison with bun

bun is said to be 30 times faster than Node.js. This is because bun is based on Webkit’s JavaScript engine (JavaScriptCore). bun also functions as a package manager and demonstrates high speed in dependency installation. bun uses its own lock file called bun.lockb and can replace npm, Yarn, and pnpm lock files. Also, bun demonstrates high speed in script execution and dependency addition/removal.

However, there are some concerns with bun. First, like ESBuild and Vite, bun provides an abstraction layer on top of existing tools. This means bun may have difficulty keeping up with the latest tools and may introduce additional bugs. Also, bun lacks a version manager, preventing developers from freely switching versions. This can be a problem especially for development teams using multiple OSes.

Comparison with vite

vite focuses on speeding up development environments. vite loads module imports on-demand and compiles only the modules needed during development, significantly reducing development time. vite also supports integration with frameworks like Vue.js and React, providing a fast development experience for projects using these frameworks.

In comparing vite and bun, vite focuses on speeding up development environments while bun focuses on speeding up package management and runtime. vite can significantly reduce development time, especially in frontend development. Meanwhile, bun demonstrates high speed in package installation and execution, particularly showing advantages in large projects and continuous integration environments.

Conclusion

pnpm may replace npm and Yarn from the perspectives of speed, disk efficiency, and security. These features allow developers to perform more efficient and secure dependency management. However, ultimately, which package manager is optimal needs to be determined by project requirements and team preferences.