Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
DottaandPaperclip d38cdf261a perf(ui): speed up Tasks and Inbox startup (#18492)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - Tasks and Inbox are the main entry points for that work.
> - Earlier changes made their data reads and row counts smaller.
> - Those changes remain, but shared controls now pull in the whole
task-detail bundle.
> - A cold open can also read a remembered organization before selecting
the one in the URL.
> - This pull request separates collection code and selects the
addressed organization first.
> - It warms task code after collection paint, so the next task open
stays fast.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

Refs #17756, #18323, #16849, #17041, #17983, #17960, #18461.

**What happened?**

Tasks and Inbox still use their optimized index reads and row budgets.
However, small shared controls and hooks were placed in the task-detail
chunk. A collection had to download that whole chunk. The HTML also
preloaded it on every route. The original production profile loaded
about 6.5 MB of decoded JavaScript before useful rows, or 1.9 MB
transferred with compression.

Company bootstrap could select a different remembered organization
before Layout selected the URL's organization. This started unnecessary
company reads. A retained multi-company browser fixture reproduced two
attention-count requests for different companies.

**Expected behavior**

Show correctly scoped, stable collection rows without waiting for
task-detail code. Keep compact reads, bounded rendering, direct task
preloading, immediate New Task input, and fast follow-on navigation.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Use a production UI build with Coordinator enabled and two active
organizations.
2. Remember one organization, then cold-open Tasks or Mine in the other.
3. Inspect startup script and company requests before the first useful
row.

The baseline UI revision is `91fdf02e95`. This is a UI change. It has no
API, schema, migration, or authorization changes.

## What Changed

- Group the static collection dependency trees above the task-detail
group. Keep the existing startup and task grouping strategy.
- Preload task detail and its static dependency closure early on direct
task and agent-chat URLs. Keep collection aliases out of that preload.
- Fetch the immutable task chunk at low priority after a collection
paints, or on a same-origin task-link hint. After a successful immutable
response is fully read, module-preload the cached chunk so it can
compile without executing. A failed HTTP probe skips module preload.
- Prefer an addressed active organization during bootstrap. Preserve
manual selection, archived-company handling, and account-scoped company
lists.
- Preserve a task reading anchor when a programmatic scroll event
reports an unchanged offset during restore reflow. Strengthen the Back
journey to wait for a completed collection navigation.
- Add production-browser checks for delayed indexes, correct company
scope, stable row geometry, failed speculation, and early direct-task
preload. Update collection verification notes and the feature map.

## Verification

Final source: `e402ab7fc6`; baseline UI: `91fdf02e95`.

- All **234 focused unit cases** and **44 production-browser journeys**
passed on the final source: 33 task journeys and 11 collection journeys.
Coverage includes compact history, saved cards, draft persistence,
avatar continuity, failed-probe recovery, delayed data, pagination, deep
links, desktop/mobile and reading-position restoration through Back.
Desktop and mobile screenshots were inspected.
- Workspace typecheck, full production build, map checks, token gates
and diff checks passed. The default local `pnpm test:run` still stops
before executing tests because the existing chat-test line selector
reports `No test found` (1,816 skipped). This is not a passed full local
test suite. Focused tests and remote CI remain separate evidence.
- Greptile reviewed the exact final commit at **5/5**, with zero open
review threads. Final code CI passed. The complete check inventory is
**55 successful, 3 skipped, 1 neutral**. The neutral result is the
separate Paperclip Review: its agent finished without completing an
assessment, so it is not a passing review score.

Five alternating baseline/candidate pairs per scenario, Chromium
151.0.7922.34, 1440×900, 4× CPU, 50ms latency, approximately 9Mbps down
/ 1.5Mbps up. Cold cases use fresh browser contexts with normal cache
writes enabled; warm cases use the same context and normal application
query cache. Both previews use the server's immutable hashed-asset cache
policy and uncached HTML, with real local feature settings and no
request interception. All task-owned builds and suites were stopped
during timing; other host activity was uncontrolled. Readiness requires
useful rows and editable search, or the readable task thread and
editable composer, followed by two animation frames.

| Journey | Baseline median (range) | PR median (range) | Median paired
saving |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Cold Tasks | 3239 ms (3189–3333) | 2545 ms (2441–2682) | +752 ms |
| Cold Inbox | 3207 ms (3203–3268) | 2679 ms (2502–3062) | +541 ms |
| Warm Inbox | 717 ms (701–917) | 760 ms (745–768) | -47 ms |
| Warm Tasks | 1150 ms (1126–1207) | 1136 ms (1119–1174) | +18 ms |
| First task click | 943 ms (932–1008) | 1007 ms (976–1098) | -74 ms |
| Back to Tasks | 584 ms (568–617) | 566 ms (559–575) | +10 ms |
| Cold direct task control | 3389 ms (3377–3402) | 3415 ms (3395–3896) |
-13 ms |

All five pairs improved for each cold collection. The signed saving is
baseline minus candidate for each pair; it is distinct from the
difference of medians. Warm navigation is broadly similar. First task
click was 74ms slower by median paired difference. Direct-task median
paired difference was 13ms slower, with one slower 3.90s candidate
sample retained in the range; this is not a claimed direct-task speedup.

Completed script transfers by collection readiness fell from about
**1.91MB to 1.14MB** (Tasks), and **1.90MB to 1.14MB** (Inbox). Task
code warms after rows paint. At the test bandwidth, the removed 0.77MB
critical transfer represents roughly 0.65s of download time; CPU and
network overlap, so their savings are not added. Unthrottled loopback
API control medians stayed about 17–18ms in both variants. All 30 cold
samples had zero browser errors.

Rejected experiments remain separate: automatic splitting produced over
200 startup requests; disabling recursive grouping slowed direct tasks;
HTTP-only warming improved collection startup but slowed first task
opens. The final correction preloads direct dependencies and compiles
successfully cached code after paint. Routing disables HTTP caching, so
intercepted runs were kept as diagnostic evidence rather than used for
warm-cache acceptance; see [Playwright's cache
behavior](https://playwright.dev/docs/api/class-page#page-route). Vite
preview's default asset `no-cache` policy was also corrected to match
the shipped server before final measurement.


## Risks

- Bundle placement affects shared consumers. Browser checks cover
collections and task navigation; the full PR checks also cover other
routes.
- Code warming still transfers the task chunk if the user stays on a
populated collection. It moves that download past first paint and does
not execute it. This is a startup latency improvement, not a claim that
all eventual bytes disappear.
- A direct click before warming finishes still loads code on demand.
Direct task and chat URLs retain early module preload.
- Local browser evidence does not establish a deployed staging speedup.
This PR does not merge or deploy itself.

## Model Used

OpenAI GPT-6 (Codex), with reasoning, tool use and local code execution.
The context-window size is not exposed in this environment.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run the relevant tests locally and they pass (234 unit
cases and 44 browser journeys; the full-command limitation is documented
above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All code CI gates are green (the separate Paperclip Review is
neutral because its agent did not complete an assessment)
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-31 22:12:41 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip aa58fa1073 perf(ui): restore fast Coordinator task and inbox loading (#18323)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip lets people manage work done by agents.
> - Tasks, Inbox, and Needs You must stay usable as work history grows.
> - The Coordinator views bypassed some existing collection
optimizations.
> - Navigation fetched complete decision cards for a count, and Tasks
mounted every loaded row.
> - This PR uses the canonical attention rules for small count and
task-ID responses. It also restores bounded rendering and the optimized
Inbox selection.
> - The benefit is less data and less initial rendering work without a
second definition of pending work.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

Coordinator navigation fetched the full attention feed on every cold
collection visit. Tasks rendered the entire loaded collection.
Coordinator could also select the old Inbox loader when Streamlined UI
was off.

**Expected behavior**

Fetch only the projection needed by each surface. Start with a bounded
set of rows. Keep complete task membership, accurate counts, current
permissions, and stable loaded rows.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Enable Coordinator and open Tasks or Inbox with an empty browser
query cache.
2. Observe a complete attention-card download for the navigation badge.
3. Open a large task list and observe that every loaded row mounts at
once.
4. Disable Streamlined UI while keeping Coordinator enabled, then open
Mine and observe three overlapping compact task reads.

Related work: #17756, #3744, #17983, and #18312.

## What Changed

- Add board-only attention count and complete task-ID projections. Reuse
canonical company, privacy, addressee, deduplication, dismissal, snooze,
and archive rules. Skip card bodies, plan/image reads, and presentation
roster lookup.
- Share the small count read across desktop and mobile navigation. Reuse
the page-owned response on Needs You and Needs attention. Keep the
newest known count through navigation, including zero.
- Use the task-ID index for Needs attention and keep task row hydration
in batches of at most 100.
- Render 100 task rows initially, across the whole expanded tree. Reveal
150 more at a time through scrolling or a button. Keep existing rows
through refresh and append. Defer offscreen leaf layout with shared
tokens.
- Keep Coordinator on the optimized Inbox when Streamlined UI is off.
Use index reads for expanded project recents.
- Add real-database, component, and production-build browser regression
checks. Update the access and feature maps.

## Verification

- All required CI checks pass on
`1c68ac8957490a6c8585ba0939355f536c8120bf`: typecheck, build,
server/workspace tests, serialized database suites, and eight E2E
shards. Greptile is **5/5**, with its row-retention finding fixed and
the review thread resolved. Storybook checks were intentionally skipped;
Paperclip Review completed neutral.
- Workspace typecheck and production build passed locally. The final
rebased source also passed UI typecheck and production build. Token
gates and map checks passed.
- The attention service suite passed all 34 tests on disposable
PostgreSQL. Final targeted checks cover compact projections,
complete-set counts, quality approvals, snoozes, private tasks, and
board/company access. Database response capture confirms compact
projections do not read plans or images. All 31 OpenAPI tests passed
after registering both endpoint contracts.
- Six production-build browser journeys passed: desktop, mobile,
Coordinator Inbox with Streamlined UI off, Needs You, Needs attention,
and an older server page followed by task open/Back. They verify the
initial 100-row budget, scrolling, retained DOM identity/height, one
owner per attention read, complete task membership, 220 retained rows on
Back, and less than 2 px of return-position difference.
- The row-budget and Inbox regressions fail against original source and
pass with this change. The final three affected UI suites passed 40
tests, and the broader Inbox/IssuesList suites passed 101 tests
serially.

### Controlled production-build comparison

Baseline `b31ec0a2dc079e32272a8f618425fe92b68bbaec` versus PR head
`1c68ac8957490a6c8585ba0939355f536c8120bf`. Isolated baseline asset
`index-CS9uPxMx.js`; candidate asset `index-BxJeTQ30.js`. Both UI builds
used the same warm disposable API server and database, with 220 tasks
and 110 pending board approvals. Chromium **151.0.7922.34**, 1440 × 900
viewport, **4× CPU throttle**, loopback with no added network latency,
alternating baseline/candidate order. Cold cases use a new browser
context with network cache disabled; warm cases navigate within the same
context. Other host workloads are uncontrolled.

Readiness requires the destination collection's first visible task row,
then two animation frames. Inbox readiness waits for its canonical Mine
route so previous-page rows cannot satisfy the measurement. Five paired
samples per case; cold Inbox has a second five-pair confirmation wave
because the first result was slower. Times below are **milliseconds**;
parentheses show min–max. Paired savings are the median of individual
before-minus-after pairs, not the difference between medians.

| Journey | Pairs | Baseline median (range) | Candidate median (range) |
Median paired saving | Faster pairs |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Cold Tasks | 5 | 2752 (2542–3025) | 2300 (2275–2524) | 328 | 5/5 |
| Cold Inbox | 10 | 2536 (2283–2927) | 2582 (2117–2856) | 37 | 5/10 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 5 | 2054 (1826–2479) | 1448 (1419–1548) | 635
| 5/5 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 5 | 2020 (1485–2254) | 1568 (1289–1848) | 350
| 5/5 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 5 | 1747 (1609–1948) | 1327 (1238–1355) | 472 |
5/5 |

Cold Tasks, warm Tasks, warm Inbox, and Back improved in every measured
pair. **Cold Inbox latency is inconclusive:** the two waves pointed in
opposite directions, with the candidate faster in 5/10 pairs. This PR
claims less badge work there, not a proven cold Inbox latency
improvement.

The canonical badge response shrank from **200,039 to 359 decoded
bytes** (encoded HTTP transfer: **8,125 to 598 bytes**). The compact
response also skips card payloads, plans, images, and presentation-only
roster work. These are measured mechanism reductions, separate from
end-to-end latency. Needs You still owns its full card feed; Needs
attention owns its complete task-ID projection. Reproduction setup and
assertions are in `tests/perf/collections/README.md`.

<details>
<summary>Individual paired readiness measurements (ms)</summary>

| Journey | Pair | Baseline | Candidate |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: |
| Cold Tasks | 1 | 3025 | 2283 |
| Cold Tasks | 2 | 2542 | 2275 |
| Cold Tasks | 3 | 2752 | 2424 |
| Cold Tasks | 4 | 2783 | 2300 |
| Cold Tasks | 5 | 2641 | 2524 |
| Cold Inbox | 1 | 2927 | 2702 |
| Cold Inbox | 2 | 2422 | 2629 |
| Cold Inbox | 3 | 2409 | 2606 |
| Cold Inbox | 4 | 2621 | 2769 |
| Cold Inbox | 5 | 2539 | 2856 |
| Cold Inbox | 6 | 2283 | 2117 |
| Cold Inbox | 7 | 2466 | 2558 |
| Cold Inbox | 8 | 2674 | 2286 |
| Cold Inbox | 9 | 2696 | 2389 |
| Cold Inbox | 10 | 2533 | 2183 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 1 | 2479 | 1423 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 2 | 2228 | 1548 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 3 | 2054 | 1419 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 4 | 1826 | 1448 |
| Warm Tasks navigation | 5 | 1954 | 1518 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 1 | 2020 | 1661 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 2 | 2198 | 1848 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 3 | 1733 | 1497 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 4 | 2254 | 1568 |
| Warm Inbox navigation | 5 | 1485 | 1289 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 1 | 1721 | 1330 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 2 | 1747 | 1275 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 3 | 1948 | 1355 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 4 | 1609 | 1327 |
| Task → Back to Tasks | 5 | 1790 | 1238 |

</details>

### Failed attempts and limits

- The local full repository command hit embedded PostgreSQL startup
failures and 16 failures in the untouched native session executor suite;
it was stopped. The full local suite is not claimed green. CI on the
final revision provides the broad test result.
- A concurrent local UI run hit timing failures under host contention.
Inbox/IssuesList subsequently passed all 101 tests serially. No tests
were weakened to address these timeouts.
- CI caught two integration gaps introduced during this work: missing
OpenAPI entries for the new endpoints, and an attention fixture
incompatible with the routine filters added on master. Both were fixed;
the affected 31 OpenAPI and 40 UI tests pass.
- The final revision's first CI attempt failed two untouched tests:
scheduled-retry batch cancellation and the tool-access audience/archive
race. Both failed jobs passed when rerun without changing the revision.
Their original failed attempts remain visible in [the workflow
history](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41083379875).
- Browser evidence uses synthetic disposable data. This PR is not
deployed staging or production verification.

## Risks

- New attention sources must preserve canonical eligibility. Both
projections call the existing collector, so they share its permissions
and complete-set behavior.
- The count and task-ID caches must not stand in for full decision
cards. Each projection has its own key under the existing attention
invalidation prefix.
- A row budget can omit descendants if applied per parent. The tests
cover one global budget across a large expanded tree, refresh, append,
reset, and incremental loading.
- Local browser evidence uses synthetic data and is not staging
deployment proof.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, tool use, and code
execution. The exact backend model deployment ID and context window were
not exposed in this session.

## Checklist

- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass (affected suites; broad-run
limitations are listed above)
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge

---------

Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-10-30 11:58:53 -05:00