mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 15:55:46 +01:00
1fa7e92fa83087fbf427ff18c2d11fa0a4a21d85
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandClaude
|
6505538fc5 |
fix(realtime): limit a shared live-event read set to 100 events and 250 ms (#20632)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - The server sends the output of a running agent to the browser on the
company WebSocket.
> - #20624 lets the events that are already in the queue share one set
of permission and redaction reads.
> - That set could serve a full queue of 1,000 events for one second.
> - If access is revoked during that time, the principal still receives
the queued output. The security scan on #20624 reported this.
> - This pull request limits one set to 100 events and 250 ms.
> - The benefit is a small, stated limit on output that a revoked
principal can receive, with the same delivery speed.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #20624
**What happened?**
After #20624, one set of permission reads can authorize each event that
was in the queue when the set opened. The queue holds at most 1,000
events or 1 MiB. The set stays in use for one second. If a membership,
an API key or a task grant is revoked in that time, the server still
sends the remaining queued events.
**Expected behavior**
A revocation stops delivery after a small, fixed quantity of queued
output. The documentation states that quantity.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a company WebSocket as a user who can read a private task.
2. Publish 1,000 transcript events for a run of that task in one burst.
3. Revoke the task grant while the server delivers the burst.
4. The server delivers the remaining queued events.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at
|
||
|
DottaandClaude
|
070d6f83fd |
perf(realtime): share permission reads among queued live events (#20624)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work.
> - A task page shows the output of a running agent as it is produced.
> - The server sends each output event to the browser on the company
WebSocket.
> - Before each send, the server checks permissions and redacts secrets.
Each event did its own sequential database reads.
> - When output arrives faster than those reads complete, the queue
grows. The text reaches the browser later and later, and the server then
closes the connection.
> - This pull request lets the events that are already in the queue
share one set of reads.
> - The benefit is that live output keeps pace with the run, and a
revoked permission still applies to the next event.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
On a hosted instance, the live output of a running task sometimes
appeared very slowly. A probe WebSocket on the company event stream
received events 0.5 seconds after their creation time at the start.
After 30 seconds the delay was 23 seconds. The server delivered about 6
events each second. Then it closed the socket with code 1013.
The delivery loop for a connection is serial. For each transcript event
it ran a membership read, a scope decision, a run lookup and a task read
decision. Native run events added a settings read and a secret registry
read. A burst of 200 events issued 1,401 SQL statements.
**Expected behavior**
Live output reaches the browser at the rate the run produces it. The
cost of the permission checks does not grow with the number of events in
a burst. A revoked permission stops delivery immediately.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Use a deployment that authenticates users, with a database that has a
network round trip.
2. Start several agent runs that produce output at the same time.
3. Open the task page of one run and read the live output.
4. Compare the creation time of each `heartbeat.run.log` or
`heartbeat.run.event` message with its arrival time.
5. The delay grows continuously until the server closes the socket with
code 1013.
**Paperclip version or commit**
`master` at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
6cc765bd81 |
feat(live): deliver recoverable transcripts to interested views (#17456)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip should show live agent output without repeating presentation work for every view. > - Execution, acknowledgements and durable checkpoints must remain independent of browser interest. > - The server already owns authorization and redaction at delivery. > - A shared browser connection can declare which visible runs need full transcripts. > - Catch-up must handle subscription races, disconnects, terminal output and slow consumers. > - This PR delivers the backend and UI contract together without a database migration. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Visible transcript consumers receive recoverable output through one shared browser connection. **Current behavior** Independent views can create duplicate connections, presentation work and recurring history reads. A subscription race or filtered native history can lose the saved tail. **Proposed behavior** Negotiate run interests, subscribe before catch-up and retain independent canonical recovery cursors. Keep lightweight lifecycle and attention events available without full transcript delivery. PR 4 of #17097 → #17439 → #17455 → #17456. The runtime feature is independent of hot-upgrade recovery; the stack order is for review convenience. ## What Changed - Add additive WebSocket capability negotiation, replacement interests, revision acknowledgement and resynchronization notices. - Reference-count visible consumer interests on one company-scoped browser connection. Preserve older-client/server behavior. - Reuse canonical structural/current-user/registered-secret redaction for plugin run notifications through the same bounded delivery queue. Keep producer and uninterested streams free of recipient lookups. - Refresh application queries after the matching recovery acknowledgement, including one follow-up after an older in-flight read. Ordinary interest acknowledgements add no refresh. - Keep authorization and redaction at delivery. Browser interest cannot change harness execution, PRP ACKs, checkpoints, accounting or canonical logs. - Deduplicate by sequence and log identity. Catch up terminal output and saved tails without recurring reads during healthy negotiated streaming. - Bound delivery to 1,000 items and 1 MiB. Overflow requires resynchronization; persistent congestion closes the connection. - Preserve compact-history expansion from current master across paginated catch-up. Snapshot the original read window before React can defer its update. ## Verification On current source `f6710f0b3c`, Linux [job 122604880503](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122604880503) executes all five run-read permission cases successfully (2.574 seconds), including grant and revocation on the same connection. Its shard passes all 2,430 cases. Current [server-shard job 122604880416](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122604880416) has 1,513 passes, one failure and three skips: an unchanged nested-clone expiration/restore test exceeds its 15-second deadline. The preceding `5efc6c48bf` source has identical non-document bytes; [its corresponding job 122601359272](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40623017917/job/122601359272) passes all 21 nested-clone cases, including that case in 9.505 seconds. The exact timing cause is unproven. The single diagnostic [retry job 122609332597](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40624101891/job/122609332597) passes all 21 nested-clone cases (61.316 seconds), including the formerly timed-out case in 7.003 seconds, and all 1,514 shard cases (three skips). The failure remains recorded; no timeout or assertion was changed. After the server squash merge and qualification retarget, all 50 focused server cases and all 91 focused UI cases pass again, with both typechecks and token gates. Runner vendor preparation rebuilds current master inputs before those tests. This source needs fresh CI and reviews; prior CI and browser receipts do not qualify it by inference. Current candidate `f6710f0b3c` now targets master `6987c2f20b`, after merged #17097, #17439 and #17455. Its diff contains only transcript delivery and its documentation. It adds no database migration. Retargeting changes only the evidence document; all production and test code is byte-identical to `5efc6c48bf`. On the eighth integration, all 50 focused server delivery cases and all 91 focused UI cases pass, with both typechecks and token gates. The following 35-case receipt belongs to the earlier delivery correction. Four low-queue authorization/decoration stall variants and the late-rejection case fail before correction. They now verify the five-second read deadline, old and negotiated clients, revisions that cannot reset the deadline, unaffected sibling connections, rejected late results, and timer cleanup. The first combined toast run has four loopback EPERM failures and 31 passes; its permitted repeat passes all 35. Earlier 28-case evidence excluded the toast file. The permission correction requires the current HTTP company-scope transcript permission, plus task access, for both native events and legacy logs. Prior Linux source `49a8783e9b`, job 122549913643, executes all five run-read cases, including grant/revocation on the same connection, successfully. That source placed this file in server shard 11; later shard assignments can differ and must be checked against their actual inventories. The older `405bedd189` receipt retains a separate scheduled-retry teardown race and inherited fixture collision; neither is waived. The new head must pass again in Linux CI. The seven extracted stream-recovery tests preserve their assertions. All 39 related legacy/native cases, UI typecheck and token gates pass after restoring the initially missed fixture helper. Earlier full workspace build/typecheck and Chrome journeys at `445a76563c` cover two views, company switches, reconnect, terminal catch-up, reload and zero recurring healthy transcript reads. Those browser receipts are historical source evidence and do not qualify this new head by inference. The [qualification record](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/blob/f6710f0b3c84c6fdb2021df67206261b446dfc97/doc/plans/2026-10-22-hot-upgrade-qualification.md) retains exact earlier UI/history, source-boundary and cleanup failures with their fixes and limits. The workload-cost test preserves bounds and authorization callback counts for zero interests, one viewer, multiple browsers and a slow viewer. Its socket congestion is simulated. It measures neither SQL nor network costs. Current permission checks and the final hosted active-agent/viewer matrix remain unmeasured; no production savings are claimed. Fresh exact-head CI, legacy status, completed Greptile 5/5, resolved feedback and ordinary merge eligibility remain required. The earlier recipient corrections pass all 47 registry/plugin/delivery/WebSocket/toast cases and all 174 UI provider/recovery/interest cases, both typechecks and token gates on source `b202e59a25`. A real bus/host-service test registers a synthetic run secret through the production registry and reproduces its raw notification before the fix; native/legacy/final notifications now redact it, disposal prevents late worker notification. A later P1 review reproduces lost final notifications on settings-read and secret-resolution failure. Both cases fail before correction. Any delivery failure or subscription timeout now sends one content-free stream error and removes the plugin subscription. It never changes the agent execution or run status. Later events start no new redaction reads. The final integrated six-file server lane passes all 50 cases, with server typecheck and token gates. Existing browser delivery behavior is unchanged. Storage and secret-provider seams are scripted. Two real React Query/provider regressions first miss a run during resync; both now refresh after the valid replacement ACK, including pending-read and stale-scope cases. The prerequisite qualification batch passes all 118 cases and E2E typecheck after master integration. Fresh CI, security scan and reviews remain pending on this head. The contribution-rule review correction removes 104 explanatory comments introduced by this slice and keeps the ordering, deadline and plugin-delivery explanations in the delivery document. Existing comments and functional test/lint directives remain. All edited source files have identical parsed non-comment tokens before and after the change. All 50 server delivery cases and all 91 cases in six affected UI suites pass, along with token gates. The new head requires fresh CI, security and review. ## Risks A slow or disconnected viewer must resynchronize from authorized canonical history. It may see a display gap until catch-up completes. Company changes and revoked access must remove delivery interests. This slice adds no database migration and cannot change execution or recovery authority. Full transcript delivery evaluates current company-scope permission per delivery. Active plugin recipients also perform canonical redaction reads; viewer-load database costs on this final source remain unmeasured. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, repository tools and code execution. 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 - [ ] 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> |