[Payment due @ZhenjaHorbach] [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline by TMisiukiewicz · Pull Request #94182 · Expensify/App

TMisiukiewicz · 2026-06-22T14:07:21Z

Explanation of Change

Removes useArchivedReportsIDSet() from the Search getSections pipeline (Search/index.tsx and useSearchSections.ts).

That hook subscribed to the entire REPORT_NAME_VALUE_PAIRS collection and rebuilt a Set via an O(n) Object.entries scan over every RNVP on every collection change — for every search type — even though getSections only needs a single report's archived status, and only for task searches.

Now the components pass the raw reportNameValuePairs collection into getSections/getTaskSections, which calls isArchivedReport(reportNameValuePairs?.[key]) directly (O(1) lookup) where needed. Same data source and coverage as before; the eager Set construction is eliminated.

Out of scope: SearchWriteActionsProvider / canEditFieldOfMoneyRequest still use the set (untouched).

Fixed Issues

$ #94193
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

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

ZhenjaHorbach · 2026-06-22T14:30:59Z

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 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 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 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.
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

2026-06-22.16.36.35.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

2026-06-22.16.38.24.mov

iOS: HybridApp

2026-06-22.16.36.35.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

2026-06-22.16.38.24.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

2026-06-22.16.33.14.mov

melvin-bot · 2026-06-22T14:40:00Z

🎯 @ZhenjaHorbach, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

melvin-bot · 2026-06-22T15:15:17Z

@sobitneupane 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]

codecov · 2026-06-22T15:29:42Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/hooks/useSearchSections.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/components/Search/index.tsx	`0.86% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	`64.47% <50.00%> (ø)`
... and 317 files with indirect coverage changes

github-actions · 2026-06-22T15:44:03Z

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

github-actions · 2026-06-22T15:49:56Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #94182.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-25744d79526-9980e46-a99965009c6649760b68c0f00f1600c0664adf43/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-25744d7-9980e46-3d02c91b862f76691c37320725eecb608b5bc619/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://94182.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-06-22T15:58:57Z

✋ 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 · 2026-06-22T23:29:11Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.17-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-06-22T23:30:37Z

Help site review — no changes required ✅

I reviewed the changes in this PR against Expensify's help site articles under App/docs/articles.

Conclusion: No documentation updates are needed, so I did not create a draft PR.

Why: This is a purely internal performance refactor of the Search getSections pipeline. It swaps the eagerly-built useArchivedReportsIDSet() (an O(n) scan over the whole REPORT_NAME_VALUE_PAIRS collection) for a direct O(1) isArchivedReport(reportNameValuePairs?.[key]) lookup. The PR description and diff both confirm the data source and coverage are identical — same archived-status result, just computed more efficiently.

There is no change to any user-facing behavior, feature name, tab, settings label, button, or workflow, and the PR is marked [No QA] with testing limited to "no console errors." Nothing here maps to content in the help site articles.

If a reviewer believes a specific user-facing behavior did change and should be documented, reply with @MelvinBot <details> and I'll re-evaluate.

OSBotify · 2026-06-23T22:01:25Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.17-3 🚀

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

melvin-bot · 2026-06-23T22:04:46Z

🤖 Payment issue created: #94375

OSBotify · 2026-06-23T23:39:55Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.17-3 🚀

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

Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline

bdd96f6

melvin-bot Bot assigned TMisiukiewicz Jun 22, 2026

TMisiukiewicz changed the title ~~Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline~~ [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline Jun 22, 2026

ZhenjaHorbach approved these changes Jun 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot changed the title ~~[No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline~~ [Payment due @ZhenjaHorbach] [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline Jun 22, 2026

mountiny mentioned this pull request Jun 22, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-06-30] [Payment due @ZhenjaHorbach] [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline #94193

Closed

mountiny marked this pull request as ready for review June 22, 2026 15:15

mountiny requested review from a team as code owners June 22, 2026 15:15

melvin-bot Bot requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and sobitneupane June 22, 2026 15:15

melvin-bot Bot removed request for a team June 22, 2026 15:15

mountiny approved these changes Jun 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny removed the request for review from sobitneupane June 22, 2026 15:25

mountiny merged commit 25744d7 into Expensify:main Jun 22, 2026
50 of 51 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jun 22, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-06-22 #94222

Closed

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 23, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-06-30] Payment issue for E/App PR#94182 #94375

Closed

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

[Payment due @ZhenjaHorbach] [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline - #94182

[Payment due @ZhenjaHorbach] [No QA] Avoid building archived reports ID set in Search getSections pipeline#94182
mountiny merged 1 commit into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/search-avoid-building-archived-reports-set-in-getsections

TMisiukiewicz commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

Uh oh!

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

TMisiukiewicz commented Jun 22, 2026 • edited by mountiny 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!

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

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jun 22, 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!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 22, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jun 22, 2026

Help site review — no changes required ✅

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 23, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

TMisiukiewicz commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

ZhenjaHorbach commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jun 22, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading