1 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	bf7f77d8cd	fix: avoid response recovery self-contention (#18715) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - The server must present accepted agent responses as comments under current chat authority. > - The recovery worker can check four tasks at the same time. > - Different tasks can share a chat endpoint or external principal. Their authorization transactions then compete for endpoint or identity locks. > - A failed transaction leaves the accepted response pending and repeats its source queries on a later retry. > - This pull request groups checks that share a task, endpoint or principal before dispatch. It keeps every transactional authority check and lock. > - The benefit is less failed recovery work and prompt, exactly-once presentation of valid accepted responses. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #17714 for a separate publication-commit lock-order fix. Refs #18686 for separate run-list JSON work. Neither changes this recovery admission path. **What happened?** A response-presentation worker reported `could not obtain lock on row in relation "chat_endpoints"`. Four real PostgreSQL recovery fixtures reproduced three such failures in one pass with no external ingress. The worker grouped by task, while authorization locks shared endpoints and principals. Review also exposed two valid Slack endpoints in one workspace that share one principal and compete for its try-advisory lock. **Expected behavior** Recovery checks that share an endpoint or principal should retain task order without competing with one another. Unrelated endpoints should make progress. The server must still reject stale authority and retry legitimate external contention. **Steps to reproduce** Run the shared-endpoint regression or the portable comparison helper linked below. The fixture creates four accepted historical responses for distinct tasks and principals on one actual endpoint. ## What Changed - Read optional endpoint and principal scheduling hints through a company-scoped join to the canonical wake action. The join does not change eligibility or grant authority. - Extend existing bounded check groups to merge intersecting resource keys. Preserve task order, transitive conflicts, independent-group progress, shutdown, drain and pending scopes. - Add real PostgreSQL controls for shared endpoints, a principal shared across two endpoints, an observed blocked transaction with independent endpoint progress, external locks, exact selected output, and endpoint revocation despite a forged hint. - Add a portable helper that materializes the pinned baseline with `git show`, runs the existing real fixture, retains results, and restores temporary files. ## Verification - Final principal-extension head `57047441b28765ed1cf49b8924efc69f5c03dcb4`: 34 focused scheduler/chat controls passed on Node 24.22.2 / pnpm 9.15.4. Independent exact-head source review is green. Full local `pnpm -r typecheck` and `pnpm build` pass on this head. Fresh Greptile and Paperclip reviews are both 5/5 with no findings. All 59 final-head contexts are complete: 55 success, 3 skipped, and the neutral Paperclip review at 5/5. There are no failures or pending checks. - Earlier endpoint-only head `eea437e7edbe7eb41eb880d4d8fd6d99a9c247da`: full local typecheck/build and all remote CI passed. The redundant local full suite was interrupted for this review fix after 956 passing chat cases; it is not a full local pass. - Final shared-principal counts-only comparison completed the same two exact responses: product calls 165 → 147, rows 114 → 100, outer contention failures 1 → 0. SQL query errors stayed zero; advisory-lock refusal is not a failed SQL query. - The earlier endpoint-only study completed five alternating pairs / ten measured runs: median calls 443 → 293, rows 314 → 200, query errors 6 → 0 for four exact responses. Its instrumented shared-host CPU data predates the principal extension and is not a final-head or hosted CPU claim. Retry clocks were accelerated; wall time is not hosted latency. - [Raw samples, final principal work counts, portable commands and failure accounting](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/57047441b28765ed1cf49b8924efc69f5c03dcb4/doc/performance/2026-11-03-response-presentation-contention.md). - Initial server4 CI reported three provider calls instead of two in the unchanged Anthropic identity fixture. The exact local case passed; the full 88-case file passed with observations showing the two expected identity-route calls. The third CI call's origin remains unknown. One bounded rerun of the failed job and its dependent CI aggregate passed. No assertion or source change was made for that failure. - The causal benchmark baseline worker/query is `82c033ed127d07862e6765aa4b69a3cf339bde81`. The PR base is `36df8933f0`. They are not claims about the currently serving revision. ## Risks - Connected resource groups can reduce parallelism when tasks link several endpoints. This preserves the existing task ordering contract. - Missing or stale endpoint/principal hints retain current transactional checks. Other workers and ingress can still cause legitimate NOWAIT retries. - There is no schema, API, permission or provider-transport change. Endpoint revocation and company isolation remain enforced by their existing owners. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6.1 Sol (`gpt-6.1-sol`), with tool use and code execution, produced and reviewed this change. The runtime does not expose the 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>	2026-11-03 06:04:25 -06:00