mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-12 06:10:44 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
d007afbf86
## Thinking Path - With a warm lifecycle, one session serves consecutive turns on a task. A follow-up comment wakes the next run, which claims the warm session's instruction copy and reuses the session. - #20048 makes warm the default on remote sandboxes. Its merge condition includes "no restart or follow-up ever leaves a task needing Retry". - In the #20048 Daytona chaos wave, task t12's follow-up run was created 43 ms after the previous run settled. The previous run was still releasing its warm session, so `claimWarmNativeInstructionCopy` saw it busy and failed the run with `native_session_supervisor_busy`. The task then needed a Retry. - The release takes seconds and always finishes, so a follow-up should wait for it rather than fail. A session busy because another run is preparing or executing a turn is a genuine conflict and must still fail at once, as existing tests require. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #20048 **What happened?** Wave w-20261108T142906-s9501, t12 (claude, warm): run 5b839da4 succeeded at 14:46:36.224. The follow-up run f2bf2f05 was created at 36.267 and failed immediately with `adapter_failed` / `native_session_supervisor_busy`, from `claimWarmNativeInstructionCopy` called by `instruction-working-copy.prepare`. Its automatic retry also failed, and only a user Retry completed the task. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Run a warm native session turn to completion. 2. While that run is still releasing its warm session (post-turn instruction check, release, hand-back), admit the next run on the same session. 3. The next run's instruction-copy claim throws `native_session_supervisor_busy`. **Expected behavior** The follow-up waits for the previous run's release (bounded) and reuses the session. A session held by a run that is still preparing or executing fails admission at once, as before. ## What Changed - `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.ts`: - When the provider turn ends, the executor records the session scope as settling (`settlingNativeSessionScopes`). The outer `finally` clears the mark once the run has handed every scope back. - `claimWarmNativeInstructionCopy` waits, polling every 25 ms for at most 30 s (`warmSessionReleaseWait`), while the warm entry is busy and its scope is settling. It then re-reads the entry and runs the existing checks. If the entry is still busy at the deadline, or busy for any other reason, it throws `native_session_supervisor_busy` as before. - No wait happens on the normal path (entry idle), so turn admission adds no latency. - `server/src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts`: two cases. - A follow-up claimed while the previous turn's post-turn check is held: it waits, then succeeds once the release finishes. It fails on master with the wave's error. - The release outlasts the bound: it fails busy. **Previous-release state:** the change touches only in-memory admission state, so no saved run or session state changes. ## Verification - `cd server && npx vitest run src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts src/services/heartbeat/instruction-working-copy.test.ts`: 1301/1301 pass. - With the wait removed (behaviour on master), the "release finishes" case fails with `native_session_supervisor_busy`. - The existing concurrency tests ("fences owned instruction preparation: concurrent", and the settled-release ownership tests) still fail admission at once. - Not yet covered: the Daytona warm wave rerun for #20048. ## Risks - **A wait that never ends.** The wait is bounded at 30 s and happens only while the owner is past its turn, which always reaches the outer `finally`. Every caller of the inner executor runs inside that `try`, and attachment staging keeps the same session scope. - **Hiding a real conflict.** Only a settling owner is waited for. A preparing or executing owner fails at once, as the existing tests assert. - **Scope.** I tried a similar wait at execution admission, but it conflicted with deliberate fences that reject a run during a settled release (the existing "releases settled codex only under its current owner" tests). It is not part of this PR. ## Model Used Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`, Anthropic), 1M context window, tool use and code execution, via Claude Code. ## 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 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>