Skip to content

Skip Search auto-refetch diff when transactions are unchanged - #103436

Merged
mountiny merged 1 commit into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/search-auto-refetch-skip-unchanged
Oct 8, 2026
Merged

mountiny merged 1 commit into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/search-auto-refetch-skip-unchanged

Conversation

@TMisiukiewicz

@TMisiukiewicz TMisiukiewicz commented Oct 8, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

useSearchAutoRefetch re-runs its effect on snapshot, loading, and focus changes. By then usePrevious has already caught up, so the effect was diffing the full transaction collection against itself (Object.keys twice, a Set build, Object.entries) and always found nothing. This PR adds an early return when transactions and reportActions are the same references as the previous ones and no search is pending, which preserves behavior because every check already evaluated to false in that case.

It also makes hasChangedTransactionInSearchResults loop over the transactionsIDs array the effect already computed, instead of calling Object.entries(transactions) a second time and allocating N pairs.

Measured on web (dev build, large account, ManualOpenReport span, 4 runs each): hasChangedTransactionInSearchResults total in a trace went from 120ms to 11ms. ManualOpenReport went from 4156, 3894, 4017, 3855 (avg ~3981ms) to 3903, 3742, 3797, 3638 (avg ~3770ms), about -210ms (-5%).

Fixed Issues

$ #103443
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. Open the Spend/Search expense view and create a new expense. Verify the list refetches and shows the new expense.
  2. Edit the amount of an expense shown in the Search results. Verify the row and the total update.
  3. Open a report from Search, change nothing, and go back. Verify no extra Search requests fire.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. On the Spend/Search expense view, go offline and edit an expense shown in the results.
  2. Go back online. Verify Search refetches and the results reflect the edit.

QA Steps

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
  • 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 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 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)
  • 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)
  • 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
    • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
    • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
    • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
    • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
  • 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: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex usage limits have been reached for code reviews. Please check with the admins of this repo to increase the limits by adding credits.
Credits must be used to enable repository wide code reviews.

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from flaviadefaria and mountiny and removed request for a team October 8, 2026 10:30
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mountiny 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 removed the request for review from a team October 8, 2026 10:30
@nkdengineer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MelvinBot Review.

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The change looks correct and safe to merge. I found no blocking issues.

  • Early return keeps behavior. When both collections match their previous references, the effect had no ID changes and no changed transaction to find. The early return useSearchAutoRefetch.ts:86-89 only skips that no-op. The !hasPendingSearchRef.current check still lets a deferred offline or unfocused refetch run.
  • Helper change is equivalent. Object.keys and Object.entries return keys in the same order, so the new loop checks the same transactions.
  • Tests cover the risk. The second test fails if the pending-search check is removed. CI passes, except Check independent approval, which is unrelated.
Optional follow-up (not blocking)

The newTransactions loop in useSearchAutoRefetch.ts:73-82 runs Object.keys and Object.entries on every render, even when transactions === previousTransactions. It also returns a new array each render, which defeats the useMemo in BaseSearchList/index.tsx:175-176. The same reference check, plus a stable empty array, could save more time. This issue existed before this PR.


view run

@nkdengineer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • 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 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)
  • 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)
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately
    • 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
    • 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 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
    • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
    • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
    • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
    • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
  • 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.2026-10-08.at.17.55.15.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-10-08.at.17.52.56.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-10-08.at.17.51.41.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-10-08.at.17.54.25.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-10-08.at.17.50.23.mov
Screen.Recording.2026-10-08.at.17.49.46.mov

@nkdengineer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Verified that the calling time is better with the same account

  • This PR
Screenshot 2026-10-08 at 18 15 31
  • Main
Screenshot 2026-10-08 at 18 13 21

@nkdengineer nkdengineer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you!

@mountiny
mountiny merged commit 50ef12d into Expensify:main Oct 8, 2026
44 of 47 checks passed
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
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 OSBotify mentioned this pull request Oct 8, 2026
90 tasks done
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.5.6-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No help site update is needed. This PR is an internal performance change that skips redundant work in Search's auto-refetch logic, so nothing users see or do changes.


view run

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.5.6-6 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

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.

5 participants