mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-08 12:33:05 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
d180ad8c77
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - A task Retry must use the current task and chat authority. > - The request and queue paths already retain a Retry through brief lock contention. > - Execution checks that authority twice, including after native input preparation. > - A busy task row or chat identity could fail the admitted run at either check. > - This pull request retries only the rolled-back authorization transaction. > - The same run can proceed after the lock clears. The final dispatch gate still rejects changed ownership. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** A failed chat task can accept a normal Retry and then fail during execution setup when another PostgreSQL transaction holds the task row or chat identity lock. The late check can fail after native input and workspace preparation. The exception can then enter the workspace preservation path. **Expected behavior** Keep the same admitted run and its frozen input. Retry a recognized, rolled-back authorization conflict within the existing bound. Recheck current authority before each attempt. Reject Stop, paused agents, revoked chat access, or a changed task owner before the execution callback. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Admit a normal failed-chat task Retry with the existing PostgreSQL fixture. 2. On a second connection, hold the task row or the chat identity advisory lock when execution authorization starts. 3. Release the lock after the real authorizer reports contention. 4. Observe that the original code fails the run before the authorized callback. Repeat at the late native check after input preparation. **Paperclip version or commit** Reproduced on master `039e0dad2c51c80251e1302a19c5566e039c357a`. The branch is rebased on `8f06bd4e1`. **Deployment mode** Source checkout with real PostgreSQL and the local HTTP Retry route. Provider and chat transport responses use controlled test fixtures. Refs: #18895 and #18896 cover request and queue admission. This change covers execution authorization. #18898 and #18989 cover predecessor cleanup, a separate boundary. The roadmap and public PR search show no duplicate execution-authorization repair. ## What Changed - Recognize the existing typed chat-presentation contention error in the bounded admission retry helper. Keep its existing PostgreSQL lock-unavailable handling. - Use that helper at both execution authorization checks. Each attempt checks cancellation and the applicable legacy controller lease, then opens a fresh transaction. The loop contains no provider or workspace callback. - Include failed-chat Retry in the existing final dispatch ownership gate. This preserves current task ownership and native recovery owner checks after a delay. - Add real PostgreSQL contention, late prepared-input, Stop, pause, revocation, owner replacement, native completion, and ordinary legacy completion controls. Document the retry and dispatch boundaries. ## Verification - The unchanged base failed real task-row and chat-identity contention cases. A separate late native case failed after frozen input preparation. A safety control then proved that a replaced task owner could still reach the backend; the final dispatch gate fixes that path. - All 11 PostgreSQL cases and all four helper controls pass. The tests keep exact frozen model and trust input, reject changed authority, and do not replay a provider callback. - A real local HTTP Retry reaches the native executor, one controlled provider turn, one accepted result, a committed finalizer, and one published chat reply. Reprocessing the canonical request does not start another turn. - A separate real HTTP ordinary legacy Retry runs one controlled adapter callback, completes its task through the normal service, and does not replay the canonical request. - Independent review found no material issue in the two production files. It checked transaction scope, lock order, current ownership, native lease expiry, and import cycles. - The full workspace typecheck and full `pnpm build` pass on this head. Full `pnpm test:run` passed all 1,916 chat integration cases. Its broader server group reported the existing workspace-runtime case `returns a bounded structured conflict and exposes only same-company workspace references` as failed after 46 ms. The unchanged focused case and the complete 179-case file both pass on rerun. The active broad run was then stopped for this finite handoff; its child exited 130 and the command exited 1. The detailed assertion was buffered and was not retained, so its exact cause remains unknown. This is a partial local run, not a full local pass; later local groups did not run. All three CI chat shards pass. [Greptile reviewed this exact head at 5/5 with no findings](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/19017#issuecomment-6638521119). - Retained setup and fixture failures are not counted as product regressions or passes. An incomplete copied Copilot runtime failed the first typecheck; the supported installer repaired that isolated dependency, then typecheck passed. Early acceptance fixtures used a wrong publication field or did not complete their task; the final controls use the real field and completion service. - The first CI run failed [workspace shard 1](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363/job/126769239992) on child-server startup and a five-second dense ZIP test deadline. [Server shard 2](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363/job/126769239908) failed an existing local runtime readiness probe. All 18 cases in the two CLI files and the runtime case then passed unchanged locally on this head. The CLI files also match an earlier independently verified head byte for byte. One failed-job rerun was requested. Its [server job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363/job/126777070120) was cancelled after the runner received a shutdown signal. It produced no test verdict. After that workflow ended, only the interrupted server job and its required dependents were rescheduled once. The [complete workspace rerun passed](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363/job/126777070125). The [rescheduled server job](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363/job/126781960353) and its aggregate passed. The [complete current-head workflow is green](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/41885475363). All required current-head CI and security gates pass, including the Ready-triggered scans; three conditional checks are skipped. The complete unchanged idle-history file also passes all 75 cases locally. No timeout or assertion changed; all attempts remain part of this result. - These local controls do not claim hosted-provider or Linux sandbox acceptance. The original task-row failure did not retain a SQLSTATE; the PostgreSQL reproduction proves the local gap without assigning that original cause. ## Risks - The existing bound allows 50 backoffs of 100 ms. It limits backoff time, not total database or lease wall time. - Native ownership is checked at the final dispatch gate. The per-attempt controller lease assertion applies to legacy execution. - A persistent lock or changed authority still fails closed. Unknown prior provider effects and accepted work retain their existing guards. - No migration or model, account, trust, credential, or permission policy change is included. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6 through Codex, with reasoning, tool use, code editing, and PostgreSQL verification. The host 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 within the stated scope: relevant regression and acceptance controls, and the complete chat, idle-history, and workspace-runtime files. The broad local run remains partial as recorded above. - [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>