mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-28 12:04:41 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
3be54534c2
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Managed Git workspaces retain task and run obligations until cleanup is safe. > - Activity, expiration, retention and rehome share a run association query. > - That query repeatedly extracted three keys from wide historical JSON contexts. > - This pull request decodes those keys together and projects the six fields its consumers use. > - Native bindings, cleanup vetoes, lifecycle locks and fresh deletion checks stay in place. > - The benefit is less database work while preserving the same cleanup decisions. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Workspace activity and eligibility queries repeatedly decompress large run contexts. An OR predicate extracts issue, task and workspace compatibility keys separately. The run scope also materializes columns its lifecycle consumers do not read. **Expected behavior** Read the same relevant runs and preserve all deletion and rehome vetoes with less repeated JSON work. Keep existing native, historical and pointer bindings independent. **Steps to reproduce** Run the synthetic PostgreSQL comparison below against baseline `db70c5acd92f50fa37fb4f0dea3da0e7685089a2`. Repeat the small, large-tree and combined controls documented in the PR. Related work: #17464 preserves workspace descendants. #17877 reconstructs native workspace obligations. This change preserves both contracts and adds no scheduling change. ## What Changed - Decode the three legacy context keys together with `jsonb_to_record`. A strict root-object guard preserves scalar, array and null behavior. Independent native and pointer bindings still match. - Materialize the full textual tree-ID set once. This avoids inflated recursive estimates triggering JIT compilation for the correlated decoder. - Project the six run lifecycle columns used by activity, expiration, orphan retention and rehome. - Add binding, lease, malformed-shape and fresh-read regression cases. Add a reproducible four-control benchmark and detailed evidence documentation. ## Verification - Full repository typecheck passed on the integrated final source. - Six relevant suites passed all 209 tests against real PostgreSQL, including the 20 new binding/shape cases, 25 eligibility cases, full Git expiration/restoration, task-directory retention and configuration, and isolated repository rehome. These cover conflicting bindings, company isolation, duplicate admission, pending cleanup, controller leases, non-object contexts and newly active consumers. - PostgreSQL 17.11 comparisons use two warmups and five alternating samples per variant. Each sample runs eight sequential workspace queries. Every complete caller result and six-column relevant-run multiset matches. - Stress fixture: 4,813 runs and about 332 MB of run storage, with unique wide contexts. Last-activity median: 1,071.54 to 743.45 ms per eight workspaces, 1.44 times faster. Closed eligibility: 814.29 to 713.86 ms, 1.14 times faster. Idle eligibility: 721.46 to 481.69 ms, 1.50 times faster. - Small-history control improves 1.23–1.36 times. The 250-descendant stress control improves 1.24–1.30 times. Combined small-history/large-tree activity and idle checks improve 1.19–1.22 times. Combined closed eligibility is neutral: 61.11 to 62.82 ms per eight, about 0.21 ms extra per workspace. - Stress last-activity ranges do not overlap: 920.27–1,111.22 ms before and 689.14–880.40 ms after. Closed-eligibility ranges overlap; its smaller median gain is directional. - Last-activity buffer accesses fall from 113,202 to 38,081. Eligibility run width falls from about 1,414 to 57 planner bytes. All final plans retain one history scan with no JIT. - Reproduce: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec tsx ../scripts/benchmark-workspace-activity.ts --baseline-ref=db70c5acd92f50fa37fb4f0dea3da0e7685089a2 --docker-postgres=17 --reject-new-jit --output-dir=/tmp/workspace-activity-stress`. - Repeat with `--small`, `--descendants=250`, and both flags, using distinct output directories. Each run creates and removes its own synthetic database. - Full CI passed on `bc4edd700f983e22f093d0a01e2f4c795075b982`: 54 successful checks, one neutral review and two expected Storybook skips, plus successful Snyk status. Greptile is 5/5 on this exact head. There are zero unresolved threads and the merge state is clean. [CI run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/40530494291). - Full repository typecheck and build passed on the integrated final source. The local full test command was stopped after native PostgreSQL initialization failed repeatedly, producing 16 failures and skipped database suites. It is incomplete, not a pass. Focused real-database suites used disposable Docker PostgreSQL. Current-head CI passed all full gates separately. ## Risks - Cleanup safety depends on complete run association. Tests compare every retained run field and exercise downstream vetoes, not only row counts. - PostgreSQL plan estimates matter. Rejected per-key index probes were up to 56 times slower on a small-history/large-tree control. An ANY variant also regressed. The final shape passes all four controls under default JIT settings. - The final combined eligibility control is neutral. Synthetic SQL timings do not establish deployed latency, provider behavior or actual compute sleep. - Review suggested a CASE/jsonb_typeof root guard as an optional alternative. The strict JSONPath guard is retained because its scalar, nested-array and independent-native behavior passes real PostgreSQL tests and all four measured controls. No correctness defect was identified. A replacement needs its own comparative measurements. - Future consumers that need another run column must extend this explicit projection. - No migration, index, startup job, polling change or deployment is included. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, configured model `gpt-6.1-sol` with xhigh reasoning, tool use and code execution. Independent blast-radius review also used `gpt-6-astra` and `gpt-6.1-sol`. The runtime context window was not exposed. ## 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>