2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
DottaandPaperclip	68a09dcb5f	perf(ci): shorten the test execution critical path (#16434) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Contributors wait for the full PR workflow before they can deliver fixes. > - Server shards still execute independent files in series, and a single Runner file serializes two long real-clock waits. > - Faster work outside the critical path does not prove a faster workflow. > - Overlap independent files while preserving isolation, test cases and real production deadlines. > - Compare complete baseline and candidate workflows, separating queue delay from execution cost. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16429. Related duration refresh: #12577. **What existing behavior does this improve?** The elapsed time from PR CI creation to the last required check. **Current behavior** General server shards use one worker. One Runner transport file takes about 333 seconds on Linux, including over 100 seconds in two real-clock regressions. These are the longest verification lanes after #16429. **Proposed behavior** Run independent general-server files in at most two isolated forks. Move the two intact Runner deadline regressions into a separate file to overlap their waits in the existing pool. Run two chat partitions per existing job, each with its own temporary home and embedded PostgreSQL. Preserve serial execution within files and every assertion and timing boundary. ## What Changed - Qualify both serial and parallel forks with real worker processes, isolated homes/configuration, timers, globals and environment. - Require both parallel workers to arrive before either exits. - Use two isolated forks for sharded general-server tests; retain one worker with an explicit shared test database. Other test groups keep their existing concurrency. - Extract the lease-expiry and Pi cold-admission regressions verbatim into a separate Runner test file; retain real waits and process/lease assertions. - Split each sharded chat job into two independent invocations; preserve serial shared-database execution. Await both children before failing the parent. Prove disjoint coverage and failure propagation. - Update the paired Linux benchmark to compare a complete general-server shard with identical case inventories. - Document concurrency and deadline-test placement. No production behavior, workflow topology or runner count changes. - Allow 15 seconds for snapshot integration cases that cold-start multiple real TypeScript workers. On the repeat, one-worker cases took 2.5–3 seconds, so queued or sequential starts could exceed the default five seconds. Preserve all cleanup, queue-release and filesystem assertions; these cases do not enforce a production latency deadline. ## Verification All 48 jobs passed on scheduling head `5d718e18` in [attempt 1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/1). The [bounded repeat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/2) failed two existing snapshot-worker tests at their default five-second timeout. Its shorter duration is **not** counted as a successful performance sample. The latest head `3c894462` adds a targeted test-budget repair and [passes all 48 CI jobs](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38768433532) in **8m06s** (workflow creation to final required workflow job). This is **70 seconds / 12.6% shorter** than the 9m16s intermediate run, but the earlier 9m23s result remains part of the evidence: a stable average improvement is not established. Both branch-protection checks (`ci / verify` and `ci / e2e`) pass. The non-required Superagent Security Scan is still running; external PR scans are separate from this workflow duration. | Measurement | Before | After | What it establishes | | --- | ---: | ---: | --- | | General-server shard, paired on one Linux host | 430.94s | 292.99s | 32.0% faster; identical 1,047 case inventory | | Chat job 1 | 460s | 211s | Same full chat inventory spread across isolated partitions | | Chat job 2 | 408s | 274s | Serial cases within each child, separate PostgreSQL instances | | Chat job 3 | 408s | 216s | Total chat runner time fell from 1,276s to 701s | | Full PR workflow, first chat candidate | 9m16s | 9m23s | Not an end-to-end win in this pair: unchanged Build rose from 365s to 465s | | Full PR workflow, final repaired head | 9m16s | 8m06s | All 48 jobs pass; 70 seconds faster observed, not a controlled causal estimate | - Latest [paired benchmark](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885223) passes. Earlier paired server measurements were 33.3% and 37.4% faster. Unchanged fixture timing noise is not attributed to this PR. - All **1,337 chat case identities and outcomes match exactly** across [before-chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38760937988) and [after-chat](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38763885288/attempts/1), without duplicates or removals. Whole-suite records rose from 44,563 to 44,574: three new launcher checks and eight upstream warm-owner tests. Remaining name differences were generated fixture IDs/timestamps/PIDs, not removed tests. - The final run used `m7i-flex.xlarge` for Build (408s), with all chat jobs completing in 238s / 318s / 280s. It used the same actual merge base `afe5b341` as the first chat candidate. Optional profiling was disabled after the bounded measurement experiment; the full 48-job correctness workflow still ran. - The fleet used `m7i.xlarge` for the earlier Build and `m6a.xlarge` for the first chat candidate Build. Several unchanged compile/install/probe phases slowed together. This does not prove hardware alone caused the difference, and full-run attribution must account for runner/cache variance and the upstream base change. - Original full baseline: [all 48 jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38753547876/attempts/2), 12m07s, including a server job that queued over five minutes. It is not a clean basis for attributing the whole elapsed-time reduction to this PR. An interrupted baseline and two misrouted candidate attempts were excluded and preserved; routing/trust rules were not weakened. - Local: 32 sharding/launcher checks pass, including disjoint coverage, shared-database fallback and a failed child that waits for its sibling. Real paired chat partitions passed 416 cases in 217.63s on independent embedded databases. - Both extracted Runner deadline regressions pass unchanged with real waits. An initial local attempt rejected a Node executable under the controller home; the identical binary in an owned non-home path passed without weakening that guard. - Real worker-isolation proof, actionlint and diff checks pass. Latest-head Greptile is **5/5**, with no review threads or actionable findings. - The eight snapshot-worker cases pass locally with a private `PAPERCLIP_HOME`. The first direct local invocation failed to open the default-home lock database under the sandbox; no production guard was changed. ## Risks Parallel files and paired chat databases may expose shared-state assumptions or increase peak memory. Cases stay serial within each invocation, and explicit shared databases keep the serial path. Complete server coverage and the full 48-job CI workflow pass. Check external required PR scans before merge; the full-workflow measurements are observational and do not establish a steady 12.6% speedup. Queueing, cache state and runner variance must be distinguished from execution improvements. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with repository inspection, code execution and GitHub tools. The exact serving model suffix and context capacity are not exposed to 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 - [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 (48 jobs; both required branch-protection checks pass; non-required external security scan pending) - [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>	2026-10-15 12:22:59 -05:00
DottaandPaperclip	7ec6fd0972	perf(ci): remove repeated test setup and fixture work (#16429) ... ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - CI must check changes without making contributors wait for repeated setup. > - A complete CI profile showed 158 serialized Vitest launches and repeated dependency installs. > - A large fixture also transferred 40,000 files to prove two different size boundaries. > - This PR removes repeated controller, install, build, transfer, and wait work. > - It keeps isolated test processes and all useful regression boundaries. > - Paired command benchmarks check speed and test inventories before we claim a benefit. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #16423 for the complete CI profiling data path. No duplicate optimization PR was found. **Current behavior** Each serialized file starts a new Vitest controller. Each CI lane restores the pnpm store and installs dependencies. Large Git scanning and staging share one 40,000-file fixture. A readiness regression waits over a minute for the default database idle deadline. **Proposed behavior** Use one controller per serialized shard, with a fresh fork for each file. Restore exact installed dependencies and certified shared/SDK build outputs when inputs match. Keep the normal install and build paths on a miss. Separate the 32 MiB Git scan proof from staging above command argument limits. Cross a real database idle deadline with a one-second fixture setting. **Reason and benefit** The paired Linux CI benchmark reduced the complete 566-case serialized shard from 303.43s to 246.96s (18.6%). The Git/database fixture command fell from 156.54s to 33.78s (78.4%). Exact dependency/build restoration reduced setup from 56s to 19s (66.1%). These are measured command/setup times. They do not establish a controlled reduction in the full workflow's queue-to-completion time. **Breaking changes** None to application behavior. Tests still run in full. Test results are not cached. Cache misses preserve the existing lockfile resolution fallback. ## What Changed - Batch serialized files into one isolated, single-worker Vitest invocation per shard. Give each worker its own home, config and instance ID. - Add a real two-order isolation check for processes, environment, globals, timers and filesystem state. - Add exact dependency keys for all manifests, lockfile, workspace settings, patches, installer, runtime, platform, libc, pnpm, store and checkout path. Cache only installed package directories, not source fixtures. - Add a separate content key for the shared/SDK dependency graph. Retain the existing source/output fingerprint verifier and rebuild path. Only an exact canonical master push can populate normal caches. Stale lockfile fallback runs cannot publish entries. - Keep four real Git filename lanes above 32 MiB. Use a separate 4,000-file staging/deletion case above 2 MiB. Check every staged file, unusual names, cleanup and bounded commands. - Configure a real one-second PostgreSQL idle timeout in the readiness fixture. Assert that the backend connection changes and that another connection can write the parent row. - Add an opt-in, unprivileged Linux benchmark under `profile-ci`. It compares the tested merge tree with its actual first parent on one runner. It also removes installed outputs and qualifies a real cache restore using temporary PR-scoped entries. ## Verification - Local Node 24.19.0: unchanged serialized shard 255.69s; candidate 231.44s; all 566 cases pass in both. - Local fixture command: unchanged 189.13s; candidate 43.39s. Candidate scan 18.58s, staging 13.41s, database case 2.80s. All three candidate cases pass. - Negative control: moving readiness back inside the real parent-lock transaction fails the shortened regression at the parent-write assertion. The production source was restored and is absent from the diff. - Worker isolation check passes in both file orders. - 565 CI policy, partition and workflow regression checks pass with local HTTP/IPC access enabled. The first sandboxed attempt was denied listen access; it was not a code failure. - `actionlint` passes for the three changed workflows. - [All 48 main CI jobs passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38745643045) on head `5bec2edb2b194e74352ca697f3fd1d0ac03ce967`, including full typecheck, tests, build, browser E2E and release checks. All 158 serialized files and 3,250 cases passed through 9 controller invocations. Full typecheck/test/build were verified in CI; they were not all repeated locally. - [Paired Linux benchmark passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38745643127) on Node 24.21.0. Its baseline is `57fa6b358de62922cfa9a67766b2a227c434fcdf`; its candidate merge tree is `f68f1b32966090f11647502e31852130c20237cf`. The artifact contains results, exact case inventories, setup times and raw logs. Serialized case identities match exactly. All three fixture contracts execute in both variants. | Measured work | Baseline | Candidate | Reduction | |---|---:|---:|---:| | Complete serialized shard, 566 cases | 303.43s | 246.96s | 18.6% | | Git/database fixture command | 156.54s | 33.78s | 78.4% | | Dependency/build setup, cold vs exact hit | 56s | 19s | 66.1% | - [Honeycomb profile export succeeded on its second attempt](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38747237615/attempts/2). The first attempt failed on GitHub HTTP 503 while downloading an artifact, before export. Only the export was retried; tests were not repeated. The temporary PR-scoped qualification caches were removed after validation, reclaiming 3.34 GB. Timing artifacts remain available. - Greptile is 5/5 on the current head, with no unresolved review threads. Its P1 checkout-prefix finding was fixed in `5bec2edb2`; the corrected reporter paths and paired comparison passed. Earlier runs were superseded while this was fixed. A copy-batching experiment did not speed up the Git fixture and was replaced by the two-boundary fixture split. ## Risks - A persistent controller retains transform state longer. The local shard's maximum RSS rose from about 1.52 GB to 1.99 GB. Full CI must confirm all shards fit the runner budget. - Materialized caches are larger than metadata caches. The Linux benchmark measured real archive transfer and validation after removing installed outputs. Its hit took 19s versus 56s cold. Normal PR lanes cannot publish cache entries. Exact misses run installation. Canonical cache warming requires a frozen-lockfile install; the existing stale-lockfile fallback remains uncached. - The PR uses the trusted reusable workflow from master. The paired benchmark directly exercises the candidate dependency action; normal workflow adoption still requires this PR to merge. This PR does not change the trust references. The completed main workflow took 11m02 including queue time. No controlled full-workflow latency improvement is claimed before this workflow adopts the cache change. - Only deterministic dependency/build outputs are reused. Broad dependency-based test omission and caching successful test results are deliberately excluded from this change. - The real Runner lease minimum and cold-admission waits remain. They protect protocol boundaries and were not shortened by weakening production limits. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, shell execution and code tools. The runtime does not expose a more specific deployment 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>	2026-10-15 09:23:47 -05:00