Files
PaperClipAI/scripts/ci-profile
DottaandPaperclip 7420af26fc fix(ci): finish large Honeycomb profile exports (#16423)
## Thinking Path

> - Paperclip uses pull request CI to check changes before merge.
> - The merged CI profiler records a selected full PR suite in
Honeycomb.
> - A real 48-job profile exposed an export failure after Honeycomb
accepted only part of the trace.
> - The same run exposed three fixture subprocesses that looked like
incomplete test launches, one direct reporter without a launcher marker,
and one overlong test name.
> - The exporter needs to handle temporary ingest rejection without
sending accepted spans again.
> - This pull request fixes those cases and documents the trace display
limit.
> - The benefit is a complete, checkable CI waterfall with test-file
timings.

## Linked Issues or Issue Description

**What happened?**

The first live `profile-ci` run on #16423 completed all 48 jobs, but the
post-run exporter stopped when Honeycomb rejected part of a batch. The
initial trace had no root span. Its coverage flag also reported four
unfinished invocations and one invalid timing record.

**Expected behavior**

The exporter should pace large uploads, retry only temporarily rejected
events, and publish the root after every child is accepted. Completed
reporters should count as complete. Long test names should not erase
test timing.

**Steps to reproduce**

1. Add `profile-ci` to a CI CODEOWNER PR with the merged profiler.
2. Run the full PR suite, as in [run
38732093469](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38732093469).
3. Inspect the separate [failed exporter
run](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38733393370)
and the trace coverage fields.

**Paperclip version or commit**

`12612b06eb4332844ac4c8770a1fb6c6b7eccbc9` (PR run head, based on merged
#16378).

## What Changed

- Pace Honeycomb uploads and retry only transiently rejected events from
each batch.
- Preserve overlong test timings with bounded names and count complete
reporter pairs without a launcher record.
- Keep nested Vitest fixture runs from inheriting CI profiling and
creating false coverage gaps.
- Clarify ordinary CI access, large-trace display limits, and export
behavior in the operator guide.

## Verification

- [Full PR
suite](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/38732093469/attempts/1):
48 of 48 jobs succeeded; 10m 29s wall time. The selected jobs used the
AWS public PR fleet. The protected exporter used a separate
GitHub-hosted runner.
- [Clean Honeycomb file
waterfall](https://ui.honeycomb.io/paperclip/environments/test/datasets/paperclip-ci/trace?trace_id=01ed0c541b0442e613a030ffb6dc8d9b&trace_start_ts=1792065955&trace_end_ts=1792066584):
48 jobs, 822 steps, 2,622 file spans, and `ci.profile_complete=true`. It
was reconstructed from that run's 45 timing artifacts after identifying
three nested fixture records. The full trace also recorded 44,497 tests;
Honeycomb's chart omits some deep test spans because it displays at most
32,000 spans per trace.
- The original exporter stopped after a partially accepted batch. A
local replay of that batch succeeded. I used the authorized local
test-environment key to complete the original upload and create the
file-level view. No key was added to this branch or PR.
- `node --test .github/scripts/tests/ci-profile.test.mjs
scripts/ci-profile/reporters.test.mjs`: 18 passed.
- `pnpm exec vitest run
server/src/__tests__/vitest-chat-shards.test.ts`: 1 passed.
- `git diff --check`: passed.
- The local `pnpm -r typecheck` and profiled fixture rerun could not
start: the package-manager shim could not verify the `pnpm@9.15.4`
registry signature because its fetches failed. `pnpm test:run` and `pnpm
build` were not run locally; hosted CI is pending.
- The updated exporter has not yet run from protected `master`; this PR
remains draft until CI and review finish.

## Risks

- A 48,000-span export now takes about three extra minutes due to
pacing. Retry limits still fail a persistently rejected batch and keep
the root unpublished.
- Honeycomb may retain duplicates from an already partial export. The
clean file-level evidence trace uses a separate trace ID.
- The API key stays only in the protected `ci-profiling` environment. PR
jobs write timing artifacts but never receive it.

> For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and
discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap
with planned core work may need to be redirected — see
`CONTRIBUTING.md`.

## Model Used

OpenAI Codex, GPT-6 family, with reasoning, code execution, GitHub API,
and browser inspection. 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
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] 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 07:51:02 -05:00
..
…
…