[$250] Joined thread stuck in LHN with a 🔴 and it shows up twice in LHN.

[m-natarajan]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number:
Reproducible in staging?: Needs Reproduction
Reproducible in production?: Needs Reproduction
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @AndrewGable
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05LX9D6E07/p1724077993452629

Action Performed:

1. Create a room that userA, userB, and userC are in
2. Post a comment as userA
3. As userB go offline
4. Have userC create a thread on userA's comment, while online
5. Have userB create a thread on userA's comment, while offline
6. Have userB come back online

Expected Result:

Thread displayed one time without any error

Actual Result:

RBR displayed with error and thread displayed twice in LHN

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

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

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Onyx Data:

{
    "reportName": "Hey folks! I've reserved a \"Chef's Table\" style dinner for 6 (can maybe expand to as much as 8) at Brochu's Family Tradition Sunday night at 5:30pm! Early dinner because I'm sure we'll all be knackered from our journeys over. Give a ✋ if you're interested in joining!",
    "isOptimisticReport": true,
    "type": "chat",
    "chatType": "policyRoom",
    "isOwnPolicyExpenseChat": false,
    "isPinned": false,
    "lastActorAccountID": 0,
    "lastMessageTranslationKey": "",
    "lastMessageHtml": "",
    "lastReadTime": "2024-08-15 22:13:10.187",
    "lastVisibleActionCreated": "2024-08-15 22:13:10.187",
    "notificationPreference": "hidden",
    "oldPolicyName": "Expensify Chat",
    "ownerAccountID": 0,
    "parentReportActionID": "1849499882279174199",
    "parentReportID": "4569022691530677",
    "participants": {
        "3064822": {
            "hidden": false,
            "role": "admin"
        },
        "3079111": {
            "hidden": false,
            "role": "member"
        }
    },
    "policyID": "063B20AF6F45E248",
    "reportID": "8214043543876468",
    "stateNum": 0,
    "statusNum": 0,
    "description": "",
    "avatarUrl": "",
    "pendingFields": {
        "createChat": "add"
    },
    "errorFields": {
        "createChat": {
            "1723759990438375": "Auth OpenReport returned an error"
        }
    }
}

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ad3492834b7f724d
• Upwork Job ID: 1827073269001925896
• Last Price Increase: 2024-11-29

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @AndrewGable is eligible for the AutoAssignerNewDotQuality assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[MelvinBot]

This has been labelled "Needs Reproduction". Follow the steps here: https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/16989

[AndrewGable]

@mallenexpensify - Can you try to reproduce based on those steps?

[mallenexpensify]

Was partially able to reproduce, which I think is the core bug. ie. After coming back online as User B, I see RBR in the thread and in LHN (I don't see it shown as twice in LHN though)

I was thinking of adding External and asking a C+ to attempt reproduction too, whatcha think?

[AndrewGable]

Sounds great!

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ad3492834b7f724d

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @brunovjk (External)

[mallenexpensify]

@brunovjk can you plz attempt reproduction and share you're findings?

[brunovjk]

Was partially able to reproduce, which I think is the core bug. ie. After coming back online as User B, I see RBR in the thread and in LHN (I don't see it shown as twice in LHN though)

I got the same result:

Can we confirm the expected behavior? Should both messages go to a single thread right? In that case, 'message from B' will go to thread from C. I'll investigate further during the week, and I'm also keeping an eye out for proposals. What do you think @mallenexpensify? Thank you :D

[brunovjk]

@mallenexpensify Should we bump into slack to look for proposals?

[mallenexpensify]

@AndrewGable , can you retest to see if you're experiencing both RBR displayed with error and thread displayed twice in LHN as the actual behaviour? (since @brunovjk and I weren't able to reproduce 'displayed twice').

Then, if needed, we can update the OP for actual and expected.

Curious how easy/tough this bug will be to fix.

[ijmalik]

Hi @mallenexpensify, @AndrewGable, @brunovjk,

I’m encountering the same behavior as @mallenexpensify mentioned here.

When User-B goes online, they receive the following response. It appears to be an issue on the backend.

OpenReport:

{
    "code": 666,
    "jsonCode": 666,
    "type": "Expensify\\Libs\\Error\\ExpError",
    "UUID": "5CBABCBB-13F3-4535-9AB2-28C50BDDD7A2",
    "message": "Auth OpenReport returned an error",
    "title": "",
    "data": {
        "onyxData": [
            {
                "onyxMethod": "merge",
                "key": "report_8790068615647771",
                "value": {
                    "errorFields": {
                        "createChat": {
                            "1724824587908180": "Auth OpenReport returned an error"
                        }
                    }
                }
            }
        ]
    },
    "htmlMessage": "",
    "onyxData": [
        {
            "onyxMethod": "merge",
            "key": "report_8790068615647771",
            "value": {
                "errorFields": {
                    "createChat": {
                        "1724824587908180": "Auth OpenReport returned an error"
                    }
                }
            }
        }
    ],
    "requestID": "8ba20ee95962d1e0-MCT"
}

AddComment:

{
    "code": 666,
    "jsonCode": 666,
    "type": "Expensify\\Libs\\Error\\ExpError",
    "UUID": "E490CD6D-46BF-4EE2-8B4F-51672557284A",
    "message": "You don't have access to this chat room.",
    "title": "Room not accessible",
    "data": {
        "onyxData": [
            {
                "onyxMethod": "merge",
                "key": "reportActions_8790068615647771",
                "value": {
                    "3613819486451814722": {
                        "errors": {
                            "1724824588672995": "You don't have access to this chat room."
                        }
                    }
                }
            }
        ]
    },
    "htmlMessage": "",
    "onyxData": [
        {
            "onyxMethod": "merge",
            "key": "reportActions_8790068615647771",
            "value": {
                "3613819486451814722": {
                    "errors": {
                        "1724824588672995": "You don't have access to this chat room."
                    }
                }
            }
        }
    ],
    "requestID": "8ba20eee1bb9de43-MCT"
}

[brunovjk]

I investigated, and it does seem to be a response issue. I’ll trigger an internal to review the backend codes for us. 😊

🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @AndrewGable is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[brunovjk]

Sorry for the unnecessary tagging above, @AndrewGable. I wasn’t sure if you could assist with the backend codebase.

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

@AndrewGable, @mallenexpensify, @brunovjk Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[brunovjk]

Not overdue, same as above :D

[brunovjk]

I can't reproduce today (28 Nov):

new.expensify.com

prod.mov

dev - v9.0.67-9

lastest_main.mov

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[melvin-bot]

@AndrewGable, @mallenexpensify, @brunovjk Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[brunovjk]

Same update, I can't reproduce anymore (v9.0.69-1):

Screen.Recording.2024-12-02.at.09.26.19.mov

[brunovjk]

@mallenexpensify,

Given that this issue seems primarily backend-related but impacts the frontend, I suggest closing it for now with the option to reopen if necessary.

To ensure regressions don't occur, I propose adding a Jest unit test to simulate the following scenario:

• Users interact with a thread while some are offline, and data syncs upon reconnection.
  The test would validate proper thread display and prevent message duplications or errors.

Please let me know if you need more details or would prefer a different approach.

Thanks!

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @brunovjk. Can you add 🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed to a comment to assign an internal engineer to get 👀 before I close? Unsure if it's backend-related if we want to close or try to find someone internal to work on. Thx

Created a test case GH

• https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/449565

[brunovjk]

Thanks @brunovjk. Can you add 🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed to a comment to assign an internal engineer to get 👀 before I close? Unsure if it's backend-related if we want to close or try to find someone internal to work on.

Thank you @mallenexpensify

🎀 👀 🎀

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @AndrewGable is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[brunovjk]

Update: Initially, the issue seemed tied to the ... LHN, but the symptoms changed over time. Two weeks ago, user C's message disappeared when they came online—no errors, just no trace. This suggests the bug occurs when users interact with a thread while some are offline, and data syncs upon reconnection.

I believe it's a backend issue. We opened an "internal issue", but closed it as it seems fixed now. However, new FE symptoms may reappear, so we propose creating a test for this scenario.

Scenario Recap:

• Create a room with userA, userB, and userC
• Post a comment as userA
• Have userB go offline
• Have userC create a thread on userA’s comment, while online
• Have userB create a thread on userA’s comment, while offline
• Have userB come back online
• Verify the thread displays only once without any errors

Thoughts, @AndrewGable?

[AndrewGable]

Looks good to me! 👍

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @brunovjk , it sounds like....

• We want a test case with the steps above, I created one here
• The bug should be fixed so we can close this
• Compensation might be due to @brunovjk based on time you invested here. If you believe so, follow the below from the C+ process doc

Provide brief, yet detailed, reasoning for compensation
State the amount they feel they’re due. Standard percentages are 25, 50 and 100% of the job price.

[brunovjk]

Exactly, I care about the Tests, so that the issue doesn't occur, and closing it. We hadn't discussed compensation, I don't mind receiving it, since we've been tracking and testing this issue for months, but I agree with any decision, what I want most is to close this old issue hehe

[mallenexpensify]

@brunovjk how about 25%, $75, since you spent time on the issue and produced the test case steps (but, we didn't have an accepted solution so I don't think 50% is best (based on our process for payments and percentages).

[brunovjk]

Perfect :D

[mallenexpensify]

@brunovjk can you please accept the job and reply here once you have?
https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021865204166194804492

[brunovjk]

@brunovjk can you please accept the job and reply here once you have? https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021865204166194804492

Done @mallenexpensify

[mallenexpensify]

Contributor+: @brunovjk paid $75 via Upwork

Thx!