mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-14 17:22:00 +01:00
a75d7df9c77dfad3759cd1cd5e16eadae7d5366d
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
|
d82e5efeb9 |
perf(ui): cut repeated reads while a task is open (#20563)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - The board UI keeps an open task current with a shared company
websocket and with polling fallbacks
> - In a busy company, one open task sent 35 to 60 API requests in 17
seconds, and each request waits on the database
> - Most of these requests were repeated reads: task summaries 22 times,
the task run list 11 times, task browsers 6 times, and the 60 KB agent
list 6 times
> - The cause is not the open task. Other agents' run and task events
invalidate company-wide lists on every 300 ms batch, and the task view
polls runs and browsers on fixed intervals even while the websocket is
open
> - This pull request spaces company-wide refreshes, and it lets the
websocket replace run and browser polling while it is connected
> - The benefit is about 79% fewer reads from an open task in a busy
company, with the same polling fallback when the connection is down
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #17608
Refs #9627
**What happened?**
An open task in a busy company sent the same reads again and again. In
one 17-second visit, the UI requested `issues/summaries` 22 times, the
task live runs 11 times, the task browsers 6 times, and the company
agent list 6 times. The company live runs and the task's child lists
(`parentId`, `createdFromIssueId`, `descendantOf`) were requested 2 to 3
times each.
**Expected behavior**
A busy company must not make an open task refetch company-wide lists on
every event batch. While the live connection is open, the UI must use
events, not fixed fast intervals, for task runs and browsers. The UI
must keep its polling fallback when the connection is closed.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Open a task in a company where other agents run work.
2. Keep the task open for 17 seconds.
3. Count the API requests in the browser network panel.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Based on master at
|
||
|
Devin FoleyandPaperclip
|
e335265568 |
fix(ui): stop idle task run polling with live updates (#17608)
Stop successful empty assigned-task run queries from polling only while the matching company and session connection is open. Preserve active, pending, failed, and disconnected cadence. Share one lifecycle refresh owner between the task and chat views, discover reviewer events without task identity, and refresh after older in-flight reads settle. All 175 focused tests, 9,079 UI tests, build, typecheck, exact-head Greptile 5/5, and required CI pass. Regression mutations catch reviewer discovery, duplicate reads, readiness, failure state, missing refreshes, and scope cleanup. Earlier E2E cleanup deadlock and server cleanup timeout remain documented; failed-only reruns passed on their same commits. Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> |
||
|
DottaandClaude Opus 4.8
|
02a4f52277 |
perf(ui): event-source the company live-runs list (Phase 1) (#9627)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Its web UI keeps live views fresh with React Query, coordinated by a live-events websocket (`/api/companies/:id/events/ws`) and cross-tab polling > - We already cut the worst live-update churn (#9569, #9624), but the deeper issue is that even the "push" path is *push-the-signal, pull-the-data*: a websocket event triggers `invalidateQueries` → an HTTP refetch > - The company live-runs list (`queryKeys.liveRuns`) is the most-observed resource — the sidebar renders it on nearly every page — so its refetch is the most ambient source of churn, fired on every `heartbeat.run.queued` / `heartbeat.run.status` event > - Those events already carry enough (`runId`, `status`) to update the cached list directly, so this pull request event-sources that list instead of refetching it > - The benefit is that the always-observed live-runs list stops refetching on run lifecycle events — the first concrete step of the push-over-poll redesign ## Linked Issues or Issue Description No public GitHub issue exists; describing inline per CONTRIBUTING.md → "Link Issues or Describe Them In-PR", following the bug report template. This continues the memory/CPU-churn work from #9569 and #9624. **What happened?** Live agent-run tabs accrue high idle CPU and off-heap memory because live-update events cause HTTP refetches. Profiling showed the company live-runs list — observed on almost every page via the sidebar — being refetched on every run status change, one of the most frequent ambient refetches. **Expected behavior** A websocket event that already carries the changed data should update the cached list directly, without an HTTP round-trip, so the always-observed live-runs list does no refetch on routine run lifecycle events. **Steps to reproduce** Open the app with agents running and watch the network panel: `GET /api/companies/:id/live-runs` fires on each `heartbeat.run.status` / `heartbeat.run.queued` event even though the event payload already describes the change. **Paperclip version or commit** Branch `perf/live-runs-event-sourced`, off `master` (after #9624). **Deployment mode** Local dev (`pnpm dev`), web UI. Core UI live-updates plumbing; not adapter-specific. ## What Changed - **`ui/src/lib/live-runs-cache.ts` (new)** — pure `removeRunFromList` / `patchRunStatusInList` helpers for the cached `LiveRunForIssue[]`. - **`ui/src/context/LiveUpdatesProvider.tsx`** — on `heartbeat.run.queued` / `heartbeat.run.status`, patch `liveRuns(companyId)` in place instead of invalidating it: - terminal status → remove the run from the list, - status change on a run already in the list → update it in place, - a genuinely new run (can't be reconstructed from the event) → fall back to a single `invalidateQueries` refetch. - Removed the blanket `liveRuns` invalidation from `invalidateHeartbeatQueries`. - On websocket **reconnect**, refetch `liveRuns` once to reconcile events missed while disconnected (durable replay is a later phase). - Other resources these events invalidate (`dashboard`, `costs`, `sidebarBadges`, `agents.list`, agent detail) are unchanged — they're lower-frequency / less-often-observed and are follow-up phases. This keeps the change scoped and **client-only** (no server changes). ## Verification - `vitest`: new `live-runs-cache.test.ts` (remove/patch/no-op/undefined) and new lifecycle-handler cases in `LiveUpdatesProvider.test.ts` (terminal→remove, present→patch, new→needs-refetch) via `__liveUpdatesTestUtils`. All existing `LiveUpdatesProvider` tests still pass (33 total across the two files). - `tsc -b` clean. - Runtime: the event-sourced path is covered by unit tests; end-to-end refetch reduction should be re-measured against a rebuilt bundle with the network panel / MCP instrumentation. ## Risks Low, and client-only. - **Staleness across a dropped connection:** an event missed while the socket is down isn't replayed yet, so the reconnect handler refetches `liveRuns` once to reconcile. Durable event replay (Last-Event-ID) is a planned later phase; until then reconnect-reconcile covers the gap. - **New-run fallback:** a genuinely new run still triggers one refetch (it can't be reconstructed from the event alone), so no new runs are missed. - Aggregate resources (dashboard/costs/badges) are untouched and still invalidate (already coalesced), so their behavior is unchanged. Follow-up phases (from the design discussion): event-source `activity`/comments and the remaining class-B resources; give pure-poll resources events and drop their intervals; add durable event sequence + reconnect replay; and a shared bus (Postgres `LISTEN/NOTIFY`) only when the API tier scales to >1 replica. ## Model Used - **Provider:** Anthropic, via the Claude Code CLI. - **Model:** Claude Opus 4.8 (`claude-opus-4-8`). - **Reasoning mode:** Extended thinking enabled. - **Capabilities used:** tool use (shell, file editing), sub-agent fan-out to inventory the client polling and server push infrastructure, and the Chrome DevTools MCP to reproduce/profile the churn that motivated this redesign. ## 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 (a perf/plumbing change, not planned core feature work) - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above (continues #9569 / #9624; no duplicates) - [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 considered and documented any risks above - [ ] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes (N/A — no user-facing docs; rationale documented inline) - [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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> |