Fix: Display MoneyRequestReport as single transaction after deleting others by collectioneur · Pull Request #80107 · Expensify/App

collectioneur · 2026-01-21T12:34:46Z

Explanation of Change

Previously, if multiple transactions were added to a report and then all but one were deleted without being opened, MoneyRequestReportPage failed to display the remaining transaction. This happened because oneTransactionID still referenced a deleted transaction ID while the deletion was in progress.
I've added oneTransactionID to the useEffect dependency array. This ensures that when transactions are deleted, the effect re-runs to correctly create a transactionThread for the final remaining transaction.

Fixed Issues

$ #79732

Tests

Open a chat with another user.
Create the first expense.
Create a second expense without opening it.
Delete the first expense.
Verify that the second expense is now correctly displayed in the report.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-01-21.at.13.55.15.mov

… transaction

codecov · 2026-01-21T12:44:51Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 443 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-01-21T13:18:10Z

@ZhenjaHorbach 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]

src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx

github-actions · 2026-01-21T13:20:51Z

Code Review Complete

I've reviewed PR #80107 and found 1 potential issue that should be addressed:

Issue Found

File: src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx (line 156)

CONSISTENCY-5: Outdated ESLint Disable Justification

The ESLint disable comment states "We don't want this hook to re-run on the every report change", but after adding oneTransactionID to the dependency array, this is no longer accurate. The oneTransactionID is derived from reportTransactions, which means the useEffect will now re-run when transactions change (which are part of report changes).

Recommendation: Update the comment to accurately reflect the new behavior, such as: "We limit dependencies to avoid unnecessary re-runs, but include oneTransactionID to handle transaction deletions"

Overall Assessment:
The fix correctly addresses the React hooks dependency issue, and adding oneTransactionID to the dependency array is the right solution. However, the justification comment should be updated to reflect the new behavior.

ZhenjaHorbach · 2026-01-21T16:09:08Z

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
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

2026-01-21.17.19.01.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

2026-01-21.17.20.15.mov

iOS: HybridApp

2026-01-21.17.19.01.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

2026-01-21.17.20.15.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

2026-01-21.17.13.27.mov

ZhenjaHorbach · 2026-01-21T16:21:29Z

LGTM!

LukasMod · 2026-01-22T07:58:21Z

@collectioneur Won't this change cause openReport to be fetched even more frequently (exactly the same one)?

collectioneur · 2026-01-22T12:57:56Z

@LukasMod Yes, unfortunately, it will trigger every time transactions are added or removed. The key point here is that the report needs to be fetched when the second-to-last transaction is deleted, right after oneTransactionID changes. I haven't figured out a way to reduce the number of fetches yet. We could add if (validTransactions.length > 2) return;. I'll investigate this further and add a guards

LukasMod · 2026-01-22T14:02:25Z

@collectioneur Not really. Yesterday, I worked on a way to reduce duplicated requests on the Reports tab when we open report, but after some testing I realized that these requests are not always duplicates and that there is a high risk of regression (openReport uses multiple onyx.connect calls internally). Context: #77173 (comment)

The overall idea was to keep openReport calls to a minimum, as there are many Onyx actions involved and they will trigger rerender cascades. I just wanted to point out that with this change there is a higher risk of such request duplicates, but I don’t know a simple way to determine when a call is redundant and when it isn’t. Small guard would be always something 👍

github-actions · 2026-01-22T15:52:54Z

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

mountiny

Please add a comment to the dependency array

src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx

github-actions · 2026-01-22T15:57:58Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #80107.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩	⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Android was skipped	The build for iOS was skipped

Web 🕸️
https://80107.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

collectioneur · 2026-01-22T16:14:06Z

@mountiny added a comment with an explanation

OSBotify · 2026-01-22T21:07:47Z

✋ 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 · 2026-01-22T22:54:20Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.7-0 🚀

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

mountiny · 2026-01-23T11:59:08Z

Some deploy blockers found, testing on the revert

ZhenjaHorbach · 2026-01-23T12:01:42Z

Some deploy blockers found, testing on the revert

Looks like the original issue is worse than the regressions

collectioneur · 2026-01-23T13:02:01Z

@mountiny I’ll try to fix all the regressions today, but I think we should revert, as the bugs are quite serious

collectioneur · 2026-01-23T13:16:37Z

Oh, sorry. I didn't see that QA had already verified the revert. In that case, a revert isn't needed since the bugs aren't related to this PR 😄

OSBotify · 2026-01-23T22:05:40Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.3.7-3 🚀

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

mountiny · 2026-01-24T05:07:46Z

Correct sorry for not updating here!

fix displaying one transaction report after the deletion of the first…

85c053e

… transaction

melvin-bot bot assigned collectioneur Jan 21, 2026

collectioneur changed the title ~~fix displaying one transaction report after the deletion of the first…~~ Fix: Display MoneyRequestReport as single transaction after deleting others Jan 21, 2026

war-in approved these changes Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

collectioneur marked this pull request as ready for review January 21, 2026 13:18

collectioneur requested review from a team as code owners January 21, 2026 13:18

melvin-bot bot requested review from ZhenjaHorbach and trjExpensify and removed request for a team and trjExpensify January 21, 2026 13:18

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team January 21, 2026 13:18

github-actions bot reviewed Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

blazejkustra approved these changes Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

ZhenjaHorbach approved these changes Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny January 21, 2026 16:21

add guard to optimise useEffect and call openReport less times

e3fb2fd

mountiny requested changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/pages/Search/SearchMoneyRequestReportPage.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

add comment explaining oneTransactionID dependency

a51a72b

mountiny approved these changes Jan 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 25efcac into Expensify:main Jan 22, 2026
29 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-01-22 #80277

Closed

63 tasks

This was referenced Jan 22, 2026

Expense - Report shows skeleton loader when opening unreported expense for the first time #80281

Closed

Expense - Expense briefly disappears from background when deleting expense #80288

Closed

mountiny mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2026

[CP Staging] Revert "Fix: Display MoneyRequestReport as single transaction after deleting others" #80328

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-02-17] IOU - "It´s not here" page displayed after deleting IOU from individual chat. #79732

Closed

7 tasks

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2026

OpenReport Not Triggered When Opening Reports from Reports → Approve Page #80572

Closed

7 tasks

collectioneur mentioned this pull request Jan 27, 2026

Fix SearchMoneyRequestReport page calls openReport at least once #80613

Merged

53 tasks

Conversation

collectioneur commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 21, 2026

Code Review Complete

Issue Found

Uh oh!

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

collectioneur commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

LukasMod commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

collectioneur commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 22, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

collectioneur commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

collectioneur commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 23, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny commented Jan 24, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

collectioneur commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jan 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading

collectioneur commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading