Skip to content

Duplicate one report per tick when bulk duplicating reports - #99639

Merged
luacmartins merged 6 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
mukhrr:fix/98970
Aug 30, 2026
Merged

luacmartins merged 6 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
mukhrr:fix/98970

Conversation

@mukhrr

@mukhrr mukhrr commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

bulkDuplicateReports() built the whole selection in one synchronous pass. Every eligible expense fires its own API.write, which applies its optimistic Onyx data synchronously, so the JS thread stayed blocked until the last expense of the last report was created. Measured on dev web, that is around 120ms per duplicated expense, so 15 reports with 50 expenses each is roughly 90 seconds in a single tick and the tab dies.

This makes the loop yield between reports, so each report's writes are applied and persisted before the next one starts.

A single report of 50 expenses still builds in one pass. The durable fix is a single DuplicateReports command in the BE, and per this comment we keep using useBulkDuplicateReportAction until that lands.

Fixed Issues

$ #98970
PROPOSAL: #98970 (comment)

Tests

Precondition: a workspace with at least 3 expense reports, each holding as many expenses as you can add. The freeze scales with the total number of expenses across the selection, so more expenses per report makes the difference easier to see.

  1. Go to Spend > Reports.
  2. Tick the checkbox on the left of each report row to select all of the reports from the precondition.
  3. Click the green N selected button at the top of the list, then click Duplicate reports.
  4. While the duplicates are being created, scroll the list and move the mouse over the rows. Verify the list still scrolls and rows still highlight on hover, and that the browser never shows a "Page unresponsive" dialog.
  5. Verify that one new report named Copy of <source report name> is created for each report you selected.
  6. Open each new report. Verify it contains the same expenses as the report it was copied from, with the same amounts, merchants, categories and tags.

Offline tests

  1. Turn off your network connection.
  2. Go to Spend > Reports, select several reports, click N selected > Duplicate reports.
  3. Verify every new Copy of ... report appears right away in the greyed-out offline style, and that the page stays responsive.
  4. Turn your network connection back on.
  5. Verify the greyed-out style clears on every duplicated report.
  6. Refresh the page. Verify all of the duplicated reports and their expenses are still there.

QA Steps

Precondition: create at least 15 expense reports with 50+ expenses in each of them.

  1. Open staging.new.expensify.com.
  2. Go to Spend > Reports.
  3. Tick the checkbox on the left of each report row to select more than 15 of the reports from the precondition.
  4. Click the green N selected button at the top of the list, then click Duplicate reports.
  5. While the duplicates are being created, scroll the list and move the mouse over the rows. Verify the page stays responsive, the browser does not show a "Page unresponsive" dialog, and the tab does not crash.
  6. Verify that one new report named Copy of <source report name> is created for each report you selected.
  7. Open a few of the new reports. Verify each one contains the same expenses as the report it was copied from.
  8. Verify no errors appear in the JS console.
  • 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • I followed proper code patterns (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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • 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 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)
  • 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
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • 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 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 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.
  • 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_app.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_web.mp4
iOS: Native
ios_app.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_web.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mp4

bulkDuplicateReports built the entire selection in a single synchronous
pass. Every eligible expense fires its own API.write, which applies its
optimistic data synchronously, so nothing could paint, persist or drain
from the request queue until the last expense of the last report had
been created.

Yield a macrotask between reports so each report's writes are applied
and persisted before the next one starts.
mukhrr added 2 commits August 27, 2026 12:18
Move the yield below the guards that skip a selected report, so entries
with no reportID and entries with no matching report no longer cost a
macrotask each for work that never happens.

Handle the rejection at the call site as well. Now that the action is
async a throw surfaces as a rejected promise rather than propagating out
of the press handler, so log it instead of dropping it.
@mukhrr
mukhrr marked this pull request as ready for review August 27, 2026 07:19
@mukhrr
mukhrr requested review from a team as code owners August 27, 2026 07:19
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from FitseTLT August 27, 2026 07:19
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@FitseTLT 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 requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team August 27, 2026 07:20
@mukhrr

mukhrr commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@FitseTLT pls ignore. @nkdengineer is going to review this. thanks

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 4d3f1052d5

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".

Comment thread src/libs/actions/IOU/Duplicate.ts
Yielding between reports lets the user sign out before the loop resumes.
Signing out clears Onyx, so the reports, policies and identity captured
when the loop started belong to an account that is no longer active, and
the remaining duplicateReport() calls would write that data under the
newly active session.

Capture the account on entry and bail out after a yield if it changed.

@joekaufmanexpensify joekaufmanexpensify 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.

Good for product.

@nkdengineer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mukhrr Please merge main.

Comment thread src/libs/actions/IOU/Duplicate.ts Outdated
@mukhrr

mukhrr commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@nkdengineer done

@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.
  • 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.2026-08-28.at.15.15.07.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-08-28.at.15.12.13.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-08-28.at.15.09.23.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-08-28.at.15.06.16.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-08-28.at.15.04.26.mov

@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.

@luacmartins All yours.

@luacmartins
luacmartins merged commit d197d11 into Expensify:main Aug 30, 2026
35 of 38 checks passed
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@luacmartins

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Created this issue to add a bulk duplicate report command to the BE https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/issues/24120

@OSBotify

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

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.65-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Help site review: docs update created

The code change in this PR needs no help site update on its own — it's an internal performance fix (yield between reports, account-change guard, error logging) with no new feature, label, or flow. But reviewing the article that covers this feature surfaced three UI labels that don't match the product, so I created a draft PR to fix them.

Draft PR: #99956 — labeled HelpDot

What was wrong in Duplicate-a-Report.md

Article said Product actually shows
Click Selected N selected (button carries the count)
Choose Duplicate report (bulk flow) Duplicate reports (plural for 2+)

The bulk menu item is pluralized on selection count via useSearchBulkActions.ts:2682, resolving against en.ts:9366-9369Duplicate report for one, Duplicate reports for two or more. Both bulk sections tell the user to select two or more, so plural is correct there. The selection button label comes from workspace.common.selected in SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:183.

I also added one sentence noting that reports are duplicated one at a time, so copies appear gradually and the page stays usable — the user-visible result of your change.

The single-report flow was left alone: it uses common.duplicateReport (singular) via useExpenseActions.ts:417, and More is correct.

Verification method and two caveats

Labels were verified against the source strings, not a live session. I drove a web session to capture the labels directly, but the test account had zero expense reports (No reports yet empty state), so the selection button and its menu could not be opened. I fell back to tracing the translation keys to their call sites, which is why the permalinks above are cited rather than screenshots. Please sanity-check the wording against a populated account when you review.

I could not assign the PR to you. GitHub returned 404 on the assignability check — Expensify/App only allows assigning users with push access, and your role there is read. The PR is unassigned; you'll become assignable once you comment on it, or an internal engineer can assign you. Expensify/pullerbear is requested as reviewer, and the draft is confirmed isDraft: true with the HelpDot label applied.

Nav path left unchanged. The tester observed the path as Spend tab → Expense reports → Reports secondary tab rather than a literal Spend > Reports breadcrumb, but that was from an empty-state account, and your own test steps use Spend > Reports. I didn't have confident enough evidence to change it.

@mukhrr, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review


view run

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 9.4.65-3 🚀

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.

6 participants