Skip to content

perf: optimize useSidebarOrderedReports hook#68038

Merged
JS00001 merged 7 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/useSidebarOrderedReports-optimization
Aug 21, 2025
Merged

perf: optimize useSidebarOrderedReports hook#68038
JS00001 merged 7 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/useSidebarOrderedReports-optimization

Conversation

@OlimpiaZurek
Copy link
Contributor

@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek commented Aug 6, 2025

Explanation of Change

This PR optimizes useSidebarOrderedReports by using useDeepCompareRef to prevent unnecessary re-renders and adds test coverage.

Fixed Issues

$ #67894
PROPOSAL:

Before:
before

After:
after

Tests

  1. Open the app and navigate to the Inbox.
  2. Verify each type appears in the correct section of the Inbox, with the appropriate icon or label
    * Pinned/GBR chats at the top
    * Chats with errors next
    * Draft chats (unsent messages)
    * Regular chats
    * Archived chats at the bottom
  3. Go to Settings → Preferences → Priority Mode
  4. Set to Most Recent chats should be sorted by most recent activity
  5. Switch to #focus mode → chats should be sorted alphabetically
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

Same as tests

  • 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: 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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_native_2.webm
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_mweb_2.webm
iOS: Native
iOS_native_2.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
iOS_mweb_2.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_2.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop_2.mov

@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek force-pushed the perf/useSidebarOrderedReports-optimization branch from 5a0d1af to 4c02fa0 Compare August 7, 2025 07:48
@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek marked this pull request as ready for review August 7, 2025 11:38
@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek requested a review from a team as a code owner August 7, 2025 11:38
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from ikevin127 and removed request for a team August 7, 2025 11:38
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 7, 2025

@ikevin127 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]

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Aug 12, 2025

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 that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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 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 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 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.ts 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 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.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2025-08-20.at.20.18.10.android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-08-20.at.20.20.48.android.chrome.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2025-08-20.at.20.27.25.ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-08-20.at.20.29.36.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-08-14.at.21.59.53.web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2025-08-14.at.22.02.29.desktop.mov

@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek force-pushed the perf/useSidebarOrderedReports-optimization branch from 27d8b30 to 3b6df46 Compare August 13, 2025 14:37
@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Aug 14, 2025

Hi @OlimpiaZurek code changes LGTM. Reg. tests, can you take a look again? When I reverted all changes, only 1 test is failed. I expect it should fail with:

  • should prevent unnecessary re-renders when reports have same content but different references
  • should optimize performance by avoiding unnecessary sorting when only report order changes
Screenshot 2025-08-14 at 15 43 30

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@OlimpiaZurek, there's a bit of delay in updating the order in LHN for me on small-screen devices

Step to reproduce:

  1. Login ND
  2. Go to regular chats
  3. Compose a draft message
  4. Back to LHN
  5. Verify it pushes the chat to the topic list of regular chats
Screen.Recording.2025-08-14.at.22.15.34.mov

@OlimpiaZurek
Copy link
Contributor Author

@OlimpiaZurek, there's a bit of delay in updating the order in LHN for me on small-screen devices

Step to reproduce:

  1. Login ND
  2. Go to regular chats
  3. Compose a draft message
  4. Back to LHN
  5. Verify it pushes the chat to the topic list of regular chats

Screen.Recording.2025-08-14.at.22.15.34.mov

The delay was caused by using deepComparedReportsToDisplayInLHN itself as a dependency. I switched back to reportsToDisplayInLHN as the dependency so the hook reacts immediately. Inside the callback, I still use the deep compared value, which prevents unnecessary sortReportsToDisplayInLHN calls when only the object reference changes.

I also adjusted the unit tests. Since reportsToDisplayInLHN remains the dependency, the tests still trigger sorting in both versions (with and without the deep compared value), which is expected.

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @OlimpiaZurek. By using reportsToDisplayInLHN as a dependency, can you help to make a performance measurement to prove it will improve performance please?

@OlimpiaZurek
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @OlimpiaZurek. By using reportsToDisplayInLHN as a dependency, can you help to make a performance measurement to prove it will improve performance please?

Based on measurements from Chrome performance profiling: on the main branch, sortReportsToDisplayInLHN appears 3 times in the trace with a total time of ~13 ms. On the feature branch, it appears only once with a total time of ~3 ms. I’ve added screenshots to the PR description

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Perfect. Thank you @OlimpiaZurek

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

I will try to complete review checklist today

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@OlimpiaZurek Similar issue here, when I reverted changes, the tests are still passed.

@OlimpiaZurek
Copy link
Contributor Author

The tests pass either way because what changed is the argument we pass to sortReportsToDisplayInLHN, not the dependency that decides when the sorting run

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

If tests can't catch someone reverting your changes, they're not reliable @OlimpiaZurek.

@OlimpiaZurek
Copy link
Contributor Author

This change only affects performance, not functionality. So if it gets reverted, the user behavior stays the same. I’m not sure this is something unit tests could reliably catch

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@JS00001 It looks like it's hard to write unit tests to cover changes in this PR. Do you think we can skip unit tests for this PR?

@JS00001
Copy link
Contributor

JS00001 commented Aug 19, 2025

Yeah I agree, we need to test functionality, and it looks like the tests are doing that. Testing for perf is a bit different. I think we're fine with keeping it as is, since the functionality itself is covered

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@JS00001 do you mean we can keep the current unit tests in this PR?

@OlimpiaZurek OlimpiaZurek force-pushed the perf/useSidebarOrderedReports-optimization branch from 3de2012 to 169e354 Compare August 20, 2025 10:26
@JS00001
Copy link
Contributor

JS00001 commented Aug 20, 2025

Yeah we can keep them, I think adding functionality tests is never a downside

Copy link
Contributor

@hoangzinh hoangzinh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from JS00001 August 20, 2025 13:32
@JS00001 JS00001 merged commit ef10f00 into Expensify:main Aug 21, 2025
21 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
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.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.1.98-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.98-12 🚀

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.

4 participants