[$250] "group-by" Text Not Retained in Saved Search and Search Field

[m-natarajan]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.1.26-2
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?:
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: @JmillsExpensify
Slack conversation (hyperlinked to channel name): #Expensify Bugs

Action Performed:

1. Navigate to reports > Expense Reports
2. Observe the default search query
3. Click advanced filters > Date
4. Select a past date using the After option
5. Click Save
6. Click Save search
7. Observe the saved search in the LHN and search query in search field

Expected Result:

The group-by label/text should appear in both the saved search (LHN) and the search field.

Actual Result:

The group-by label/text is missing from both the saved search (LHN) and the search field.

Workaround:

Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?

Platforms:

Select the officially supported platforms where the issue was reproduced:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Platforms Tested:

On which of our officially supported platforms was this issue tested:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Recording.1133.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021910789058780497589
• Upwork Job ID: 1910789058780497589
• Last Price Increase: 2025-04-18
• Automatic offers:
• daledah | Contributor | 107022260

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @adelekennedy

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @adelekennedy (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.

[daledah]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-04-10 17:53:29 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

The group-by label/text is missing from both the saved search (LHN) and the search field.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When opening Search Filters Page, we call logics to build search filters value here:

App/src/components/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchPageHeader.tsx

Lines 52 to 53 in cfcbd15

	const onFiltersButtonPress = useCallback(() => {
	const filterFormValues = buildFilterFormValuesFromQuery(queryJSON, policyCategories, policyTagsLists, currencyList, personalDetails, allCards, reports, taxRates);

But since groupBy field is not added in the filter keys yet, when running buildFilterFormValuesFromQuery:

App/src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts

Line 413 in cfcbd15

function buildFilterFormValuesFromQuery(

Its value from queryJSON will not be persisted. So when saving search, groupBy will not be saved.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

First, we should put groupBy as a field into SearchAdvancedFiltersForm

App/src/types/form/SearchAdvancedFiltersForm.ts

Line 51 in cfcbd15

type SearchAdvancedFiltersForm = Form<

Then, update buildFilterFormValuesFromQuery to include groupBy

Add after here

App/src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts

Line 520 in cfcbd15

}

    if (queryJSON.groupBy) {
        filtersForm.groupBy = queryJSON.groupBy;
    }

Then update buildQueryStringFromFilterFormValues as well

App/src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts

Line 334 in cfcbd15

const {type, status, policyID, ...otherFilters} = filterValues;

const {type, status, policyID, groupBy, ...otherFilters} = filterValues;

App/src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts

Line 353 in cfcbd15

}

    if (groupBy) {
        const sanitizedGroupBy = sanitizeSearchValue(groupBy);
        filtersString.push(`${CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.GROUP_BY}:${sanitizedGroupBy}`);
    }

Then, since groupBy doesn't have a filter (its value is only reports for now), we can exclude it from logics to display "Reset filters" text

Update this logic

App/src/pages/Search/SearchAdvancedFiltersPage.tsx

Lines 21 to 23 in cfcbd15

	const shouldShowResetFilters = Object.entries(searchAdvancedFilters)
	.filter(([key]) => CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.TYPE !== key && CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.STATUS !== key)
	.some(([, value]) => (Array.isArray(value) ? value.length !== 0 : !!value));

    const shouldShowResetFilters = Object.entries(searchAdvancedFilters)
        .filter(([key]) => CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.TYPE !== key && CONST.SEARCH.SYNTAX_ROOT_KEYS.STATUS !== key && key !== 'groupBy')
        .some(([, value]) => (Array.isArray(value) ? value.length !== 0 : !!value));

And this logic as well to prevent clearing groupBy

App/src/libs/actions/Search.ts

Line 412 in bee2cb5

.filter((key) => key !== FILTER_KEYS.TYPE && key !== FILTER_KEYS.STATUS)

.filter((key) => key !== FILTER_KEYS.TYPE && key !== FILTER_KEYS.STATUS && key !== 'groupBy')

Result

Screen.Recording.2025-04-11.at.00.52.45.mov

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

None

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[adelekennedy]

reproduced

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021910789058780497589

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @shubham1206agra (External)

[mallenexpensify]

@shubham1206agra plz review @daledah 's proposal above.

Starting at LOW cuz it seems a lil too edge-case to be HIGH (and MEDIUM is for debugging). Bump up and/or tag me if you think it should be higher.

• HIGH -  UX Reliability, API Reliability and Performance issues that are part of main flows and affect a subset of users