mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-12 18:06:11 +02:00
9ba5569030
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Pull requests to this repository run a large CI matrix. The slowest check sets the time a contributor waits for a green run. > - The general-server vitest lane runs with one worker per job, so it can only go faster across runners. Twelve shards share its suites, and a recorded duration manifest decides which suite goes to which shard. > - That manifest was recorded on 2026-09-15 from 646 suites. The lane now has 871 suites and about 5031s of serial vitest time. 230 suites have no record and get the median weight, so the shards drifted apart. In run 38076972444 (2026-10-10) they ran 313s to 554s of tests, and `General tests (server (2/12))` at 618s was the slowest check of the whole run. > - An unbalanced lane wastes the runner time it already spends. The total work does not change, but one shard holds the run. > - This pull request records the current duration of every suite from two recent PR runs and keeps the same twelve shards. > - The benefit is that the twelve shards level to about 415s of tests each. The slowest server shard should drop from about 618s to about 480s, and this lane leaves the critical path. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Describe the enhancement** The general-server PR test lane is out of balance. Its shard manifest, `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json`, is three and a half weeks old and misses 230 of the 871 current suites. The heaviest shard runs 554s of tests while the lightest runs 313s. **Why is this needed** The slowest check decides the wall-clock time of every PR run. In the last fully green runs the slowest check was a general-server shard (618s, 562s, 585s, 646s in runs 38076972444, 38076844891, 38076844368 and 38073555316). A balanced lane removes about 135s from that shard at no extra runner cost. **Proposed solution** Re-record the per-suite durations from two recent PR runs (38076844891 and 38076972444) with the method that the manifest's `$comment` documents: diff consecutive per-suite completion timestamps in each shard log, and measure the first suite from the Vitest `RUN` banner. Average the two runs. Keep the chat and native-runner entries from the old manifest, because those suites run in their own lanes and do not appear in the shard logs. Drop the two suites that no longer exist. **Alternatives considered** More shards would also shorten the lane (fourteen shards level at about 355s, sixteen at about 311s). They are not needed now: `Build` (489-592s) and `General tests (workspaces-b)` (513-618s) already sit above the balanced twelve-shard level, so extra runners would not shorten the run. Those two checks are the next targets. ## What Changed - `scripts/general-server-shard-durations.json`: 873 recorded suites (was 646). 870 come from the two 2026-10-10 runs, 3 carry over (chat and native-runner suites), 2 obsolete entries are gone. The `$comment` names the source runs, the fleet, and the carry-over rule. - `.github/workflows/pr-trusted.yml`: a comment on the general tests matrix records the 2026-10-10 measurements and why the shard count stays at twelve. No workflow behavior changes. ## Verification - `node --test scripts/__tests__/run-vitest-stable-shard.test.mjs`: 29 pass. This covers the manifest coverage check, the duration-balance check (spread must stay under the heaviest suite), and the complete non-overlapping partition. - `node --test .github/scripts/tests/pr-dependency-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/pr-runner-rust-cache.test.mjs .github/scripts/tests/lockfile-refresh-workflows.test.mjs`: 17 pass. - Measurement check: the per-shard sum of the recorded durations matches Vitest's own `Duration` line within 1s on all 24 shard logs. - Simulation with the real planner (`scripts/run-vitest-stable.mjs --dry-run`, `GITHUB_WORKFLOW=PR`) on the current suite list: with the old manifest the twelve shards carry 321s to 510s of recorded tests; with this manifest they carry 413s to 415s. - Expected result on the first PR run after merge: every `General tests (server (n/12))` job finishes in about 480s (415s of tests plus about 65s of setup) instead of 374s to 618s. ## Risks - Low risk. The file only sets weights for the shard planner. A wrong weight moves a suite to a different shard; it cannot drop or duplicate a suite, because the guard tests assert the partition is complete and non-overlapping. - The durations come from the `runs-on` public PR fleet. GitHub-hosted runners are faster in absolute terms, but the relative weights, which are all the planner uses, are the same. - The manifest will go stale again as suites grow. The guard test fails when coverage drops under 50%, and the matrix comment records how to refresh it. ## Model Used - Claude (Anthropic), model ID `claude-fable-5-1`, running as a Paperclip agent through the Claude local adapter with tool use (shell, file edits, GitHub CLI). The agent collected the CI data, built the manifest, ran the tests, and wrote this description. ## 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) - [ ] 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: devinfoley <139239+devinfoley@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>