2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	1d348bbef0	fix(server): restore durable agent folders with bounded concurrency (#18531) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A replacement web server restores agent files from shared storage. > - The old restore reads each object in sequence. > - Modest network latency makes a 1,024-file folder exceed its deadline. > - This pull request uses at most eight concurrent restore streams. > - Every file must pass its size and hash checks before the folder is published. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18518 and #18526. Local deployment qualification found that a 64 MiB folder could not be restored after the old server filesystem was removed. ## What Changed - Restore at most eight files concurrently within the existing file authority service. - Cancel sibling transfers on failure. Await all workers before removing the temporary folder. - Keep the existing deadline, file-transfer database pool, authorization and publication rules. - Add regression coverage for bounded concurrency, corruption, settled cancellation, retained previous bytes and retry. - Document the behavior and update the deployment plan with local qualification evidence. ## Verification - Real PostgreSQL and S3-compatible storage: 1,024 files of 64 KiB each, plus instructions, with 25 ms added to each object GET. Delete the entire predecessor home and disable local adoption before reading through the successor. - Before: the read failed after 30.065 seconds. After: the same case passed in 4.180 seconds and fetched 1,025 objects. All owned test resources were cleaned. - The durable-file suite passed eight tests against PostgreSQL. Server TypeScript compilation passed. All 56 latest-head CI checks are complete and green or intentionally skipped, including full typecheck, build, unit and browser suites. Greptile is 5/5 with no review findings or open threads. - The plan separately records a released-container overlap proof: 130 reads, 26 saves, zero failures, two deleted predecessor containers and a retained authenticated session. That image predates this restore change. ## Risks - A cold folder can use eight simultaneous streams instead of one. Two file-transfer database connections bound the simultaneous restore callers. Streams verify bytes without loading entire objects into memory. - The 30-second deadline is unchanged. The measured size and latency do not qualify every folder at the maximum storage limits. - No schema, API or UI changes. Paid-model and hosted deployment acceptance remain separate work. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6. Tool use, code execution and repository review. The runtime does not expose a more specific model ID or context-window size. ## 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 - [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>	2026-11-01 04:09:47 -06:00
DottaandPaperclip	006d5691a6	feat(server): support volume-free web server handoff (#18518) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Its web server also owns controller admission and user commands. > - A rolling deployment starts a replacement before the old server exits. > - Shared database state alone does not preserve local agent files, browser chunks, or in-process commands. > - This pull request adds an opt-in ephemeral server contract and a local overlap test. > - The benefit is a web server that can relinquish traffic and local files without losing acknowledged work. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #18403, #18327, #18335, #18341. **Current behavior** The control-plane web server still has local agent-file authority and local command targets. A new container can miss saved bytes or send a command to the wrong process. An existing browser tab also needs chunks from its original build. **Proposed behavior** Eligible servers share only PostgreSQL, object storage and stable secrets. A replacement waits for readiness. The old server drains admitted requests, keeps owner commands available through handoff, and releases controller leases. Explicit maintenance adopts existing files before the volume is removed. **Reason and benefit** This is the application prerequisite for rolling app-only deployments. Schema migrations and permanent multi-replica operation are outside this change. ## What Changed - Store agent-file manifests in PostgreSQL and immutable bytes in S3. Treat local roots as disposable projections. Preserve existing permission checks and edit conflicts. - Add an explicit migration, eligibility and object-retention command to the production runtime bundle. - Add `/api/ready`, admitted-request drain, browser restart signaling and retained immutable UI chunks. - Carry transaction-aware work hints across controllers during handoff and active execution. Keep listeners closed when idle. - Deliver durable Stop and runtime responses to the execution owner. Recheck request lifecycle and access before response dispatch. - Reject local-only configuration in ephemeral mode. Keep the feature disabled for existing installations by default. - Add an isolated PostgreSQL/S3/proxy/browser deployment harness with independent server homes and retained failure evidence. ## Verification - All CI checks pass on `ce17b95019d3cf1cabd357d19b6d37f96782cc5c`: workspace typecheck, build, Runner checks, server/general tests and browser shards. Greptile reviewed the runtime changes at 5/5 with all findings resolved; the final commit updates maps and the plan. - Local targeted checks passed: coordinator 27; Stop/recovery 33; PostgreSQL command delivery 6; route/workspace regressions 8; bootstrap Stop 1; restart recovery 75. PostgreSQL command tests simulate the provider edge. - Local browser proof passed 91 reads and 19 saves; reconnect took 1,013ms. The tab opened Audit from S3 after deletion of A's whole home/build. This uses compiled workspace code and local-trusted auth, not released containers or live agents. - Local workspace typecheck/build passed; current server and runtime bundle passed. The earlier broad local suite was stopped after three hours and is not a passing receipt. Its retained failures and isolated reruns are documented in the plan. - Stacked #18526 adds stricter graceful-exit proof, an unready replacement control, live Runner qualification and a Stop handoff correction. Hosted enablement remains gated on those results and Cloud #1096. No hosted stack has been enabled. ## Risks - Apply migration 0422 before enabling the feature. Existing data must pass each owner's migration and eligibility checks. Do not discard a volume based on a single migration page. - Durable manifests remain authoritative after the opt-in is disabled. Rolling back to a binary that ignores them is unsupported. - Cold directory restoration and complete shutdown timing still need qualification before enabling a hosted stack. - Retained UI assets must cover the supported browser and rollback window. Cleanup is explicit; no new idle maintenance polling is introduced. - This change does not claim production zero downtime or authorize a fleet-wide enablement. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family. The exact serving model ID and context-window limit are not exposed in this session. Used reasoning, code editing, shell execution and browser automation. ## 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 - [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>	2026-11-01 01:58:54 -06:00