[vitest-pool-workers] STOR-5343: Add Durable Object eviction helpers

[apeacock1991]

Adds two new helpers to vitest-pool-workers that enable the testing of evictions for Durable Objects. It adds two new helpers:

• evictDurableObject(stub) just evicts a single DO
• evictAllDurableObjects evicts all DOs

---

• Tests
  • Tests included/updated
  • Automated tests not possible - manual testing has been completed as follows:
  • Additional testing not necessary because:
• Public documentation
  • Cloudflare docs PR(s): [Durable Objects] Add docs & changelog for eviction helpers in vitest cloudflare-docs#31686
  • Documentation not necessary because:

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 8c04e9a

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

⚠️ Issues found

.changeset/evict-durable-objects.md:

• Version type: Adding evictDurableObject and evictAllDurableObjects helpers is a new feature/API addition. Per the changeset guidelines, new features should use minor, not patch.

[ask-bonk]

The analysis is complete. Let me assess the actionable issues:

The key observations:

1. evictDurableObject doesn't call assertSameIsolate(stub) while its docstring claims it "can only be used with stubs pointing to Durable Objects defined in the main worker." This is the most defensible concern, but workerdUnsafe.evict is a runtime call that may handle cross-isolate stubs differently than runInDurableObject (which depends on the in-memory actionResults map). Eviction doesn't use that map, so the constraint may not actually apply the same way. This is uncertain — not a clear bug.

2. Test comment at line 44 ("Persist count = 2") is slightly inaccurate but trivial/formatting-adjacent.

3. The PR body states "This is reliant on a workerd change that is not pushed remote yet." This means the new tests will fail in CI until that workerd change lands. That's a process note, not a code bug per the review scope.

Let me double-check the test for the bulk eviction — after evictAllDurableObjects(), the comment says count reloads from storage (1) so next increment yields 2. The first fetch persisted count=1, then in-memory set to 999 (not persisted). After eviction, reload 1, next fetch increments to 2. Correct.

None of these rise to the level of a clear logic bug, security issue, or backward-compatibility violation. The same-isolate concern is genuinely uncertain (eviction semantics differ from runInDurableObject), and flagging it would be speculative. The comment inaccuracy is trivial. The workerd-dependency is already disclosed by the author.

LGTM

github run

[pkg-pr-new]

@cloudflare/autoconfig

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/autoconfig@14398

create-cloudflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/create-cloudflare@14398

@cloudflare/deploy-helpers

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/deploy-helpers@14398

@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler@14398

miniflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/miniflare@14398

@cloudflare/pages-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/pages-shared@14398

@cloudflare/unenv-preset

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/unenv-preset@14398

@cloudflare/vite-plugin

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vite-plugin@14398

@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers@14398

@cloudflare/workers-auth

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/workers-auth@14398

@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared@14398

@cloudflare/workers-utils

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/workers-utils@14398

wrangler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/wrangler@14398

commit: 8c04e9a

[jtolio]

How much of the TypeScript definitions come from the Workerd automated output?

[apeacock1991]

How much of the TypeScript definitions come from the Workerd automated output?

None 😅 I will try tomorrow, as I had no idea that existed!

[workers-devprod]

Codeowners approval required for this PR:

• ✅ @cloudflare/wrangler

Show detailed file reviewers

[apeacock1991]

@james-elicx this is waiting on a workerd bump before it can be merged, but be helpful to get a pass at the code before then

[devin-ai-integration]

✅ Devin Review: No Issues Found

Devin Review analyzed this PR and found no bugs or issues to report.

[workers-devprod]

Codeowners reviews satisfied

[devin-ai-integration]

Devin Review found 1 new potential issue.