[NOQA] Improve network logging: distinguish client requestIndex from server requestID by OlimpiaZurek · Pull Request #91948 · Expensify/App

OlimpiaZurek · 2026-05-28T11:04:44Z

Explanation of Change

This PR replaces the client-side request.requestID field with requestIndex and forwards the server-issued response.requestID onto HttpsError so error logs surface both IDs distinctly — client requestIndex and server requestID — instead of colliding under the same name.

Fixed Issues

$ #91732
PROPOSAL:

Tests

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]."

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

…requestID

codecov · 2026-05-28T11:14:58Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/API/index.ts	`93.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/Errors/HttpsError.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/HttpUtils.ts	`86.95% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/Middleware/Logging.ts	`87.32% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/Middleware/SentryServerTiming.ts	`82.35% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts	`81.60% <65.38%> (-0.40%)`	⬇️
... and 142 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-05-28T13:38:02Z

@situchan 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 26a5389ba8

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-05-28T13:41:07Z

                }
                const previousLength = persistedRequests.length;
-                persistedRequests = persistedRequests.filter((r) => r.requestID == null || diskIDs.has(r.requestID));
+                persistedRequests = persistedRequests.filter((r) => r.requestIndex == null || diskIDs.has(r.requestIndex));


Preserve legacy request IDs during queue reconciliation

When users upgrade with offline writes already stored in ONYXKEYS.PERSISTED_REQUESTS, those records still have the old requestID field and no requestIndex. In the cross-tab reconciliation path, those legacy rows now satisfy r.requestIndex == null and are kept in memory even after another leader tab removes them from disk, so a follower tab can later replay an already-processed write (e.g. duplicate comment/expense) if leadership changes. Please migrate/fallback to the old requestID when building the ID set and filtering, or normalize persisted requests on load.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

iwiznia

Looks good to me, can you check that the network logs now correctly log the requestID coming from the servers please?

situchan · 2026-05-28T14:51:13Z

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

android.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

Before:

After:

trjExpensify · 2026-05-28T22:53:32Z

PR doesn’t need product input as a logging PR. Unassigning and unsubscribing myself.

OlimpiaZurek · 2026-05-29T09:16:50Z

Looks good to me, can you check that the network logs now correctly log the requestID coming from the servers please?

Checked, and it logs correctly:
[info] [Network] API request error: A record already exists with this ID - {"message":"A record already exists with this ID","status":"400","title":"400 Unique Constraints Violation","requestID":"a034209e2a30bfdf-SJC","request":{"command":"OpenDraftWorkspaceRequest","data":{"policyID":"CC87CC33372981C1","apiRequestType":"read"},"initiatedOffline":false,"requestIndex":1780041109822}}

iwiznia · 2026-05-29T10:36:44Z

@situchan can you please review and ping me when you approve?

MelvinBot · 2026-05-29T16:00:08Z

Review

TL;DR: Behavior change is correct and minimal. Two small polish items + a coverage gap worth flagging before merge.

What the PR does

Renames the client-side counter on RequestDataBase from requestID → requestIndex to disambiguate it from the server-issued response.requestID.
Plumbs response.requestID through HttpsError → Logging middleware so error logs surface both IDs.
Adds a backwards-compat fallback (requestIndex ?? requestID) when reading client indexes off persisted requests already on disk.

Manual verification posted by OlimpiaZurek shows the log now correctly contains both requestID (server, e.g. a034209e2a30bfdf-SJC) and requestIndex (client, e.g. 1780041109822) — which is exactly the goal.

Findings

1. Stale identifier names in PersistedRequests.ts (nit, but worth fixing while you're here)

The comments were updated from "requestIDs" → "request indexes" but several variable names still talk about IDs even though they now hold indexes:

knownRequestIDs (Set populated with the result of getClientRequestIndex)
diskIDs local in the reconciliation block

Since this PR is explicitly about the client-index vs server-ID terminology split, leaving these names as *IDs re-introduces the same confusion you're trying to remove. Suggest knownRequestIndexes / diskIndexes.

2. Migration shim has no end-of-life marker

getClientRequestIndex falls back to request.requestID so requests persisted under the pre-PR shape don't lose their identity after upgrade. That's the right call, but RequestDataBase.requestID no longer exists on the type — anyone reading this in six months won't know it's a migration shim.

Suggest a one-liner:

// Fallback to legacy `requestID` to handle requests persisted before requestID→requestIndex rename. Safe to remove after ~1 release.

3. New HttpsError.requestID is only populated on 2 paths

Server response.requestID is plumbed into HttpsError at HttpUtils.ts:141 and HttpUtils.ts:151 (DUPLICATE_RECORD and SOCKET error paths). The other 4 throw new HttpsError(...) sites in the same file (test-mode, 5xx, throttle, generic non-OK) intentionally can't pass it because they don't have a parsed JSON body. That's fine and expected — just calling it out so reviewers don't expect the field everywhere.

4. Coverage / tests

Codecov shows PersistedRequests.ts coverage drops 0.40% because the new getClientRequestIndex fallback branch (the ?? request.requestID arm) isn't exercised. A 2-line unit test that constructs a request with only requestID (legacy shape) and asserts it's still tracked in knownRequestIDs would close the gap and lock the migration behavior in.
There's no unit test asserting that error.requestID flows from HttpsError → log middleware. Olimpia verified this manually, but a quick test in Logging's test file would prevent silent regression.

Correctness check

requestIndex++ semantics unchanged — same counter, same monotonic seed (Date.now()), just renamed. ✓
SentryServerTiming spanId now uses requestIndex — identical value, no behavior change for span correlation. ✓
Persisted-request dedup keyset (knownRequestIDs) is consistently populated via the helper on all 5 mutation paths (disk init, other-tab merge, save, update, pendingSaveOperations replay). ✓
All test fixtures updated to the new field name; no stragglers in non-test code (grep confirmed). ✓

Risk

Low. Change is mostly mechanical rename; the only new runtime behavior is requestID carried on HttpsError, which is an additive optional field. Migration shim handles users with in-flight persisted requests across the upgrade.

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-05-29T16:00:47Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

situchan · 2026-05-29T16:45:03Z

@situchan can you please review and ping me when you approve?

@iwiznia Approved

melvin-bot · 2026-06-01T10:35:09Z

@iwiznia looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

github-actions · 2026-06-01T10:36:00Z

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

github-actions · 2026-06-01T10:41:32Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #91948.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-a5904f5bee0-ba1daad-16cca1a427b466be42efc237696f9d08662e59b6/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-a5904f5-ba1daad-8027056680ff1eeb00cbe18e47bbe29d2fac6595/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://91948.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-06-01T10:44:00Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

iwiznia · 2026-06-01T12:19:00Z

Tests had passed and not an emergency

… rename Use getClientRequestIndex() for knownOngoingRequestIDs tracking and update MiddlewareTest fixtures to requestIndex so typecheck and lint pass on main. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

OSBotify · 2026-06-02T06:31:47Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/iwiznia in version: 9.3.91-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-06-02T06:34:08Z

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site files under App/docs/articles, and no documentation updates are needed.

Why: This PR is an internal network-logging improvement with no user-facing impact. It:

Renames the client-side request.requestID field to requestIndex (a monotonically-increasing client index)
Forwards the server-issued response.requestID onto HttpsError so error logs surface the client requestIndex and server requestID distinctly instead of colliding

All touched files are developer-facing infrastructure (src/libs/API, src/libs/Errors, src/libs/HttpUtils.ts, src/libs/Middleware, src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts, src/types/onyx/Request.ts) and tests. None of these change a product feature, UI label, setting, or user-visible workflow that the help site documents.

A grep of App/docs/articles for requestID, requestIndex, and "network logging" returned no matches, confirming there is nothing in the public help content tied to these concepts.

Since no changes are required, I have not created a draft help site PR.

OSBotify · 2026-06-02T21:05:09Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/iwiznia in version: 9.3.94-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-06-02T21:11:30Z

🤖 Help site review: no changes required

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site files under App/docs/articles, and no documentation updates are required.

Why: This is a purely internal networking/logging change with no customer-facing impact:

Renames the client-side request.requestID field to requestIndex (src/libs/API/index.ts, src/types/onyx/Request.ts, src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts).
Forwards the server-issued response.requestID onto HttpsError so error logs surface client requestIndex and server requestID distinctly (src/libs/Errors/HttpsError.ts, src/libs/HttpUtils.ts, src/libs/Middleware/Logging.ts).

These are developer-facing log/diagnostic concepts. They don't touch any feature name, tab, settings label, button, or user-facing workflow that the help site documents. A grep of App/docs/articles for requestID/requestIndex returns no matches, confirming none of these internals appear in customer-facing documentation.

Since no help site changes are needed, I have not created a draft PR.

OSBotify · 2026-06-02T23:51:24Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.3.94-0 🚀

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

Improve network logging: distinguish client requestIndex from server …

26a5389

…requestID

melvin-bot Bot assigned OlimpiaZurek May 28, 2026

OlimpiaZurek marked this pull request as ready for review May 28, 2026 13:37

OlimpiaZurek requested review from a team as code owners May 28, 2026 13:37

melvin-bot Bot requested review from situchan and trjExpensify and removed request for a team May 28, 2026 13:38

OlimpiaZurek mentioned this pull request May 28, 2026

[Payment due @situchan] fix: handle duplicate record for RequestMoney and clean up on discard #91601

Merged

52 tasks

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 28, 2026

View reviewed changes

iwiznia previously approved these changes May 28, 2026

View reviewed changes

trjExpensify removed their request for review May 28, 2026 22:53

fix legacy persisted request

5cd6cd1

OlimpiaZurek dismissed iwiznia’s stale review via 5cd6cd1 May 29, 2026 09:14

situchan approved these changes May 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mjasikowski May 29, 2026 16:43

mjasikowski approved these changes May 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

iwiznia approved these changes Jun 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

iwiznia merged commit a5904f5 into Expensify:main Jun 1, 2026
38 of 39 checks passed

melvin-bot Bot added the Emergency label Jun 1, 2026

mountiny mentioned this pull request Jun 1, 2026

[NoQA] Fix requestIndex type errors blocking main typecheck #92212

Merged

53 tasks

iwiznia removed the Emergency label Jun 1, 2026

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-06-02 #92309

Closed

75 tasks

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2026

Report- Switch to ND, empty report created in OD loading #92347

Closed

7 tasks

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 2, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-06-09] [$250] fix: handle duplicate record for RequestMoney and clean up on discard #91732

Closed

quinthar added the #quality label Aug 11, 2026

Conversation

OlimpiaZurek commented May 28, 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 May 28, 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 May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

iwiznia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

situchan commented May 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

trjExpensify commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

OlimpiaZurek commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

iwiznia commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented May 29, 2026

Review

What the PR does

Findings

Correctness check

Risk

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

situchan commented May 29, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

iwiznia commented Jun 1, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 2, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 2, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 2, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 2, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

OlimpiaZurek commented May 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented May 28, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

situchan commented May 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

situchan commented May 29, 2026 •

edited

Loading