mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-04 11:01:16 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
4a38ff9c92
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip manages agent work and preserves task state. > - Cloud readiness verifies an exact source revision before release. > - Its workspace tests must wait for execution and database cleanup to finish. > - Two attempts hit the same ten-second polling limit and read a running row. > - The second attempt also lost AWS runners and exceeded a fixture cleanup limit. > - This pull request waits for owned execution, bounds client shutdown, and gives verification reruns an independent runner pool. > - Assertions, source identity and required verification gates stay in place. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** [Cloud readiness run 41684102136](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41684102136) failed twice on master `367f29478d14003cc5c0f161b7ce8f3164993634`. Attempt 1 failed `heartbeat-workspace-busy.test.ts:473`: expected `succeeded`, received `running`. Attempt 2 failed the same helper in the inherited-workspace resume case at line 744. The helper polls for ten seconds, then returns the active row as if the wait finished. Attempt 2 also exceeded the 30-second `workspace-preparation.test.ts` teardown limit. Its client close had no deadline, and database plus directory cleanup shared the default hook budget despite the fixture's existing 90-second startup budget. Other attempt-2 failures show runner shutdown or lost communication. Several shutdown signals arrived at 18:05:17 UTC. Read-only AWS inspection confirms that all eight infrastructure-failed instances carry `runs-on-workflow-job-interrupted=true`. Five have explicit `Server.SpotInstanceTermination` reasons, including the server-1 runner that lost communication. Three were terminated through the fleet's shutdown path. CloudTrail records the Rust runner's interruption tag at 18:03:37 UTC and its termination by the RunsOn fleet role at 18:05:31 UTC, despite EC2 showing a user-initiated termination. Repeating the entire workflow reused the same Spot fleet. **Expected behavior** Wait for owned heartbeat execution before reading final state or scheduled retries. Bound database-client shutdown and allow the fixture's cleanup cost class to finish. Rerun verification on GitHub-hosted runners after an interrupted fleet attempt. Preserve all checks and report prior failures. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Delay the test adapter beyond the helper's ten-second polling window. 2. Invoke the ordinary local shared-workspace run or resume the deferred sandbox run. 3. Observe the old helper return `running` before the execution completes. 4. Evaluate the old runner expressions with `github.run_attempt = 2`; they still choose the interrupted AWS pool. **Paperclip version or commit** Base: `367f29478d14003cc5c0f161b7ce8f3164993634`. **Deployment mode** GitHub Actions Cloud readiness, with disposable PostgreSQL fixtures. Related: #11293 fixed the earlier gap between cancellation and retry-row insertion. This change waits for the complete execution instead. Duplicate searches covered the workspace test, retention fixture and runner shutdown reports. ## What Changed - Replace both workspace-test polling helpers with the existing heartbeat completion barrier. Keep final status, retry and coordination assertions. - Bound workspace-preparation client shutdown to one second. Apply the existing embedded-PostgreSQL fixture budget to its teardown. - Use AWS only for the first exact-source attempt. Route later verification, chaos and cloud-migrator planning/build attempts to GitHub-hosted runners. The publisher keeps its existing routing. The final branch also incorporates upstream #18821's CODEOWNER routing fix. - Add runner-expression coverage for numeric, string, missing and later attempt values. Document retry routing. ## Verification - The original workflow's failed assertions and interrupted jobs remain linked above. A local two-suite run also passed all 157 assertions and failed only the original 30-second teardown hook. - All 341 workflow contracts pass. After the master synchronization, all 347 routing and CI-planner controls pass. Actionlint passes for the three changed workflows. - A matched delayed-adapter comparison uses disposable PostgreSQL 17 databases, the same 11-second adapter delay, and the same 90-second experimental outer budget. The old helper fails with `running`; the completion barrier passes. Production test deadlines stay unchanged. - Earlier experiments hit a 30-second experimental outer limit and the macOS host's shared-memory limit during native database startup. The completed comparison uses task-owned databases on an existing test server. Those earlier attempts are not counted as passes. - All 31 workspace-busy cases pass with normal test deadlines. The 126-case workspace fixture also passes with its 90-second teardown budget. - Final-head cleanup measurements: main client close 7 ms, owned database cleanup 20,938 ms, and workspace-home removal 826 ms. A measured fixture held 124,494 PostgreSQL files (208 MiB) after repeated table resets. The measured database cleanup alone consumes most of the old 30-second hook budget. The separate baseline reproduced a timeout at that hook; the fixture now uses its established 90-second cost class. - Repository typecheck and build pass on synchronized head `2aceb3abd144a569efddabed3b7e0550ea23ceb2`. - All 157 focused cases pass on the synchronized branch, including complete PostgreSQL 18 fixture shutdown. [Full hosted CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41697804471) passes on the final head, including the required verification and E2E aggregates, all server/chat/workspace groups, Runner lanes and all eight browser shards. The separate GitHub quality-review workflow also passes. All 60 reported checks are terminal: 54 pass, three are informational neutral results, and three are expected skips. There are no failures or pending checks. The complete local `pnpm test:run` command was not run; targeted fixtures already encountered this host's shared-memory limit. Hosted CI supplies the full Vitest and browser matrix. - Greptile and Paperclip Review both give synchronized head `2aceb3abd144a569efddabed3b7e0550ea23ceb2` 5/5. There are no open review threads. - Module-boundary and whitespace checks pass. ## Risks - Hosted reruns can have different cache hit rates and queue times. They execute the same source and verification commands. - The first attempt retains the existing AWS Spot fleet policy. AWS evidence establishes several interruption-triggered failures; later verification attempts use an independent pool. This does not change the fleet's external capacity policy. - The completion barrier waits for owned background execution. A hung execution still fails the test's outer deadline. - The larger teardown budget remains finite. PostgreSQL's bounded stop protocol and cleanup errors still fail the hook. - No production execution, database schema or provider contract changes. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, based on GPT-6, with reasoning, repository inspection, code edits and test execution. The runtime does not expose the exact serving 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 - [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>