Skip to content

Conversation

@Szymon20000
Copy link
Contributor

@Szymon20000 Szymon20000 commented Sep 12, 2023

The purpose of this pull-request is to prepare app tests for batching update feature link.
Before that feature all Onyx.set or Onyx.merge were notifying its subscribers about a change right away.
Once we apply batching solution the notifications can be delayed and at the end of the current micro task cycle.
Because of that we had to reimplement waitForPromisesToResolve and sometimes use it twice in a row.

Details

  • All network requests in tests now require 1 micro task and then one macro task which is setTimout. So to properly wait for onyx updates caused by network request we need to call waitForPromisesToResolve twice in a row.
  • when using fake timers we need to call jest.runOnlyPendingTimers() after every onyx update so that setTimeout used by batching logic is executed. In order to reduce the number of places where we have to use it we use real timer by default and fake timers only when time precision is needed to make the test stable.

Fixed Issues

$ #27470
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 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 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.js 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 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • 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(themeColors.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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Mobile Web - Chrome
Mobile Web - Safari
Desktop
iOS
Android

@Szymon20000 Szymon20000 changed the title Adjust tests to batching updates Adjust tests to the batching updates feature Sep 12, 2023
@Szymon20000 Szymon20000 marked this pull request as ready for review September 12, 2023 11:38
@Szymon20000 Szymon20000 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 12, 2023 11:38
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team September 12, 2023 11:38
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 12, 2023

@pecanoro 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from pecanoro September 12, 2023 11:38
Szymon20000 and others added 3 commits September 14, 2023 13:11
Co-authored-by: Marc Glasser <marc.aaron.glasser@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Marc Glasser <marc.aaron.glasser@gmail.com>
beforeEach(() => Onyx.clear().then(waitForPromisesToResolve));
beforeEach(() => {
const promise = Onyx.clear().then(jest.useRealTimers);
waitForPromisesToResolve();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should that be .then(wairForPromisesToResolve)?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually the purpose is to flush timers if we use fake timers.
I change it so it's hopefully more clear now

*
* @returns {Promise}
*/
export default () => waitForPromisesToResolve().then(waitForPromisesToResolve);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we call this something like waitForOnyxPromise that is onyx specific as fastForwardTwoMicrotasksCycles sounds too implementation specific.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No Idea to be honest. @tgolen WDYT?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I really like the idea of having waitForNetworkPromise and waitForOnyxPromise. Would that work?

// We need to advance past the request throttle back off timer because the request won't be retried until then
jest.advanceTimersByTime(CONST.NETWORK.MAX_RANDOM_RETRY_WAIT_TIME_MS);
return waitForPromisesToResolve();
return new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, 1000)).then(waitForPromisesToResolve);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This isn't going to actually take 1s to resolve right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

True! Fixed!

@mvtglobally
Copy link

QA Regression is completed on this Adhock build @tgolen @mountiny

@allroundexperts
Copy link
Contributor

@allroundexperts would you be able to help with this?

Just started my day @mountiny. I'll confirm @ospfranco's findings.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

marcaaron
marcaaron previously approved these changes Sep 19, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes LGTM - I think at this point we are just waiting to confirm whether any fix is needed for a regression.

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Onyx.connect({
});

function clear() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe we are trying to avoid using that and prefer to wait for the Onyx method to finish because waitForPromisesToResolve is not compatible with the batched updates solution.

Co-authored-by: Marc Glasser <marc.aaron.glasser@gmail.com>
# Conflicts:
#	package-lock.json
#	package.json
@ospfranco
Copy link
Contributor

Seems some of the issues where caused by errors on the main branch. E.g. 2FA setup was caused by a FocusTrap component that crashed with a null ref, it was reverted on main and I've now updated this branch to main. I'm testing again, and will take a look into remaining issues:

Emoji - The previously tone appears for a few seconds when fast switching between skin tones
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

Security - 2FA setup seems that it is not completed, finish button does not continue process
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

Workspace - User is redirected to /not-found page after refreshing workspace chat page
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

IOU - When you return to selecting RM amount and continue, the request will be reset
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

IOU - Incorrect animation display when selecting Split bill members
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

Task - Task reverts to previous state briefly when checking or unchecking checkbox
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

Preferences - Priority mode reverts to #focus briefly when changing it to Most recent
❌ Not reproducible on main
❌ Not reproducible on branch

Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the patience on this one!

@mountiny mountiny merged commit d763b8d into Expensify:main Sep 20, 2023
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.72-1 🚀

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

@situchan
Copy link
Contributor

I suggest to retest all bugs what QA team found in this PR build.
i.e. #27230 (comment) was reproducible on this branch.
And it now became deploy blocker - #27928

@thienlnam
Copy link
Contributor

^ @Szymon20000 Are you able to investigate this?

@Szymon20000
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm busy in another project but @ospfranco has better context.

@ospfranco
Copy link
Contributor

ospfranco commented Sep 21, 2023

Just tested #27230 (comment) and indeed it is not working, but it doesn't look like it is the same problem that we ignored because of the < FocusTrap/> component that got reverted. The screens mount but nothing is thrown or happening.

@ospfranco
Copy link
Contributor

Found the problem and a potential solution

#27938

@situchan @thienlnam @mountiny

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.3.72-11 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 1.3.74-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.3.74-3 🚀

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

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.