mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-09 16:02:36 +01:00
c66b4a55efdc5675b5a5146197078b94de6407da
2
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 DottaandPaperclip
|
f69c6a8a35 |
fix(github): retry and recover review publication (#16284)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip manages agent work and its published results.
> - GitHub review bots publish task-bound assessments through governed
tools.
> - A review can survive a caller timeout because its publication intent
is durable.
> - A transient provider failure still returned a failed receipt before
recovery.
> - Gateway replay could return an empty cached result, and publication
retries had no dedicated scheduler deadline.
> - This pull request adds bounded retries, receipt recovery, and an
independent durable worker.
> - A temporary GitHub failure can recover without another review or
duplicate publication.
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
Refs #16275. That change increased the GitHub tool deadline. This change
repairs retry and recovery behavior.
**What happened?**
A one-off GitHub HTTP 503 or 429 left the caller with a failed
publication receipt. The saved retry did not have its own scheduler
worker. An identical gateway call after a timeout could return an empty
cached result instead of the saved publication receipt.
**Expected behavior**
Temporary failures should retry under current authority. Pending work
should resume at its saved deadline after restart. Exact retries should
return the current receipt. Lost responses must not create duplicate
comments, findings, or checks.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Admit an advisory PR review request and begin its assessment.
2. Return HTTP 503 or 429 for the first summary-comment PATCH, then let
GitHub succeed.
3. Submit the assessment through the run-scoped tool gateway.
4. On master, the result says publication failed. With this change, the
same call returns the processed receipt and neutral check.
5. For receipt recovery, use a shorter caller deadline and repeat the
exact call after publication finishes.
**Paperclip version or commit**
Reproduced on master at `6cb6ac3b8e40cb90d734ba115a2f22f850ff9477`.
## What Changed
- Classify transient transport, server, and rate-limit failures. Honor
Retry-After and primary reset deadlines. Stop retries for permanent
permission and validation errors.
- Retry safe reads and installation-token issuance within a bounded call
window. Retry publication writes through the existing outbox and
provider receipt checks.
- Wait for up to three publication attempts within a 45-second retry
window. Keep the durable eight-failure cap and enforce saved deadlines
on explicit retries.
- Register an independent GitHub publication worker with
transaction-owned wake notifications, startup recovery, and per-PR lease
deadlines.
- Recover exact comment, progress, and assessment gateway calls from
their stored publication. Require the same company, agent, task, run,
connection, tool, arguments, and current policy. Clear stale timeout
errors after recovery. Approved exact retries read the current receipt
through the existing signed replay path; the worker retains the verified
approval for deferred writes and still rejects revocation.
- Add regression coverage and update the connector guide and
feature/access maps.
## Verification
- Red: both one-off HTTP 503 and 429 regressions failed on master with a
failed publication receipt.
- Green: the same tests passed after the change.
- GitHub review workflows: 133 covered against isolated PostgreSQL 18.
The final combined run passed 132 and hit one fifteen-second timeout
under concurrent build load. All three variants of that workflow passed
in isolation. The earlier combined run passed all 131 workflows before
the two approval regressions were added.
- Retry policy and delivery coordinator tests: 35 passed.
- Additional focused checks passed for the actual eight-failure cap,
exact-argument conflicts, policy revocation, and timeout receipt
recovery. The approved deferred-publication and revocation regressions
failed before the review repair and passed after it, with one approval
request preserved.
- `pnpm -r typecheck`: passed. `pnpm build`: passed. `node
scripts/check-maps.mjs`: passed.
- The broad local `pnpm test:run` path remains blocked by the host's
exhausted PostgreSQL shared-memory slots. The changed database-backed
workflows use an isolated Docker database instead. All Paperclip CI jobs
passed at
|
||
|
DottaandPaperclip
|
19e9facc5b |
perf(chat): wake delivery queues from commits and deadlines (#15802)
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Chat connectors store incoming messages and outgoing publications in durable queues. > - The app checks these queues every second, even when they are empty. > - Empty scans keep the database active and hinder instance sleep. > - This pull request wakes three queue workers after transactions settle and at known retry or recovery deadlines. > - Empty queues stop scheduling checks. Existing rows retain their ordering, retry, and recovery rules. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What existing behavior does this improve?** Idle database activity from incoming chat deliveries, outgoing publications, and Slack upload receipt recovery. **Subsystem affected** `server/` — chat delivery and background work scheduling. **Current behavior** The app's one-second chat timer scans the three queues together with provider and action maintenance. Empty queues continue to query PostgreSQL. **Proposed behavior** Register three independent workers with the existing delivery coordinator. Producers announce work inside their database transactions. Commit wakes the corresponding worker. Startup restores outstanding work; persisted retries and stale claims supply the next deadline. An empty queue has no recurring scan. **Reason and benefit** Remove avoidable queue reads without requiring a new table, an external scheduler, or a persistent PostgreSQL listener. **Breaking changes** No schema or public API change. Work notifications are scoped to the app's shared database owner. Direct SQL and independent database roots do not send these notifications; startup still scans durable work. **Additional context** Refs #15625, #15750, and #15757 for the preceding sleep work. Related: #15153 reduces chat query allocation while retaining polling. This PR changes when the three queue workers run; it does not add query caching. ## What Changed - Register independent incoming delivery, publication, and Slack receipt workers on the shared scheduler. - Add transaction work signals at queue writes, endpoint state changes, and action transitions that unblock publications. Keep provider I/O outside the added transactions. - Restore deadlines from durable retry times, abandoned claims, and publication lease expiry. Share publication and receipt eligibility rules between dispatch and deadline queries. Respect incoming conversation order and lifecycle dependencies. - Exclude publications blocked by unresolved Slack tool sends. Wake them when the tool receipt changes. - Wake publication dispatch when an endpoint send finishes so free slots refill. Preserve per-endpoint concurrency, conversation order, and conservative handling of uncertain sends. - Wake receipt recovery when a stale publication becomes `delivery_unknown`, and wake queues when a provider connection recovers. - Commit interaction publications with their callback tokens so dispatch cannot see an incomplete card. - Keep provider runtimes, other action outboxes, milestone and wake-notice projection, Teams protocol maintenance, GitHub recovery, and Slack session synchronization on their existing maintenance cadence. This PR does not make the whole chat subsystem idle. - Update the instance sleep inventory with this partial migration and its remaining work. ## Verification - All 1,225 PostgreSQL chat integration cases passed across the three hosted chat shards. These cover retry and lease deadlines, blocked followers, unresolved Slack sends, provider recovery, commit visibility, and endpoint slot refill. - 32 local app-wiring, queue-worker, and delivery-coordinator tests passed after updating the wiring assertion for event-driven dispatch. Fake timers cover an hour of idle time without queue scans. - Related publication, interaction, receipt, and wake-notice tests passed locally. The 13 interaction integration cases include atomic rollback when callback-token storage fails. - Local `pnpm typecheck`, `pnpm build`, and final server typecheck passed. All hosted checks passed on the final commit, including build, typecheck, test shards, release registry checks, and the canary dry run (54 successful checks; two Storybook checks skipped for this backend change). - The last local PostgreSQL rerun was skipped because the embedded database startup probe failed after five attempts. The hosted PostgreSQL cases ran successfully; their skips only partition cases across shards. - `git diff --check` passed. Greptile is 5/5 on the final commit with no unresolved findings. ## Risks - Every producer that makes queued work eligible must send a transaction work signal. The tests exercise commit visibility, concurrent wakes, worker failures, and restart recovery. Future direct SQL writers must participate in this contract. - The existing database work-signal layer reconciles uncertain transaction outcomes. This PR adds no work-signal table or schema migration. - Provider and action maintenance still polls. Further changes are required before an idle chat-enabled instance can sleep. - Tests use real PostgreSQL with simulated provider responses; they do not send messages through live provider accounts. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, tool use, and code execution. The exact serving model ID and context-window size are not exposed in 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 - [ ] 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> |