Skip to content

Introduce shallow compare before FastSearch rebuild#62844

Merged
mountiny merged 4 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:62106-fastsearch-shallow-compare
May 30, 2025
Merged

Introduce shallow compare before FastSearch rebuild#62844
mountiny merged 4 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:62106-fastsearch-shallow-compare

Conversation

@sosek108

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

This PR introduces new method shallowCompareOptions which shallowly compares two sets of options. This information is used to determine if FastSearch object should be recreated from scratch or no.
This is done because useFastSearchFromOptions relies on options which comes from Onyx. Onyx creates new reference of object even if object didn’t change at all. In many cases object returned from Onyx is same as before so the recomputation of FastSearch is unnecessary.

Fixed Issues

$ #62106
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Login to an account with a lot of report history.
  2. Open Search via loupe icon
  3. Try to write some query
  4. Observe

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

  1. Login to an account with a lot of report history.
  2. Open Search via loupe icon
  3. Try to write some query
  4. Observe

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@sosek108 sosek108 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 27, 2025 08:43
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from parasharrajat and removed request for a team May 27, 2025 08:43
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented May 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@parasharrajat Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@parasharrajat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Reviewing...

@mountiny mountiny requested review from Nodonisko and hannojg May 27, 2025 12:40
@mountiny

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@hannojg @Nodonisko can you please review?

@Nodonisko

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Took just brief look (I am at conference this week) and it looks good. What's performance of shallow comparison with high traffic account?

@sosek108

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Took just brief look (I am at conference this week) and it looks good. What's performance of shallow comparison with high traffic account?

I've added timing analysis to this method so we can monitor it in future. At this moment time of this method running is a fraction of time that we save on not regenerating FastSearch tree

@mountiny mountiny self-requested a review May 28, 2025 23:07
@mountiny

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@parasharrajat could you please review or do you want to offload some of these?

@parasharrajat

parasharrajat commented May 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Yes, all of these new PRs on my list for today. I think I can test all of these today.

@parasharrajat

parasharrajat commented May 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Screenshots

🔲 iOS / native

30.05.2025_15.37.35_REC.mp4

🔲 iOS / Safari

30.05.2025_14.31.23_REC.mp4

🔲 MacOS / Desktop

30.05.2025_14.37.01_REC.mp4

🔲 MacOS / Chrome

30.05.2025_03.57.28_REC.mp4

🔲 Android / Chrome

30.05.2025_14.35.50_REC.mp4

🔲 Android / native

30.05.2025_17.58.32_REC.mp4

@parasharrajat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@sosek108 can you please merge main? There is an build error on android.

@sosek108

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Update

It turns out that my first PR is not stable and introduces other issues. It turns out that debouncing input value is problematic as the value is passed both ways between Input and List components. I am experimenting with server call debouncing instead of input value debouncing.

I am also experimenting in changes in useOptionsList hook. In OptionsListProvider there are few useEffects that are dependant on personalDetails and reports. So after one server call useOptionsList response changes few times even though the list is same as before. This causes heavy renders of List component.

@parasharrajat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Looks like wrong place to share the update. Did you mean to share it on issue?

@sosek108

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@parasharrajat you're right!

@parasharrajat

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Changes look good to me. I looked at the search functionality and also tried async updates to the report, such as incoming messages, things are looking good.

@parasharrajat parasharrajat left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you @sosek108 lets be on a look out for any regressions

@mountiny mountiny merged commit 00d6576 into Expensify:main May 30, 2025
17 checks passed
@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 2, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.55-0 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.56-2 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 failure ❌
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.58-0 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 4, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.1.58-4 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants