[HOLD for payment 2024-01-03] [$500] Avatar - Updated User's B avatar is not visible in real time on User A search page

[kbecciv]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.14-0
Reproducible in staging?: y
Reproducible in production?: y
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: Applause-Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

Preconditions:

1. User A and User B should have previous conversation
   Steps:
2. User A navigates to Search page ( last conversation with User B should be visible)
3. User B update profile Avatar

Expected Result:

Avatar from User B in 1:1 conversation in Search page should be updated in real time

Actual Result:

Updated User's B avatar is not visible in real time on User A search page
User A must refresh the app or navigate to other page to see updated Avatar

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6321161_1703075391915.Recording__1604.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c0216790020f8fbe
• Upwork Job ID: 1737458622592098304
• Last Price Increase: 2023-12-20
• Automatic offers:
• situchan | Reviewer | 28066439

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01c0216790020f8fbe

[melvin-bot]

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

[bernhardoj]

Proposal

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

The search page user avatar doesn't update dynamically when the user updates their avatar.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The search page use an OptionRow to render the item. We memoized the OptionRow but one of the condition is wrong, and it's the option icon.

App/src/components/OptionRow.js

Line 325 in 9ea6b39

!_.isEqual(prevProps.option.icons, nextProps.option.icons) &&

The react memo second parameter is propsAreEqual, but we check if the icon is different or not, so the component is never updated.

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

Update the condition by removing the negation (!).

[situchan]

@bernhardoj's proposal looks good to me
🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @blimpich, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[blimpich]

@situchan @bernhardoj that ! was very recently added by @TMisiukiewicz for performance reasons. Please tell me how we will address the performance issue in the solution to this issue. See this comment for context.

[situchan]

@blimpich this is regression from function migration refactor

class component:

function component:

As you see all conditions are inverted but only that line.

---

@situchan @bernhardoj that ! was very recently added by @TMisiukiewicz for performance reasons. Please tell me how we will address the performance issue in the solution to this issue. See this comment for context.

This PR removed ! (not added !) 😄 but it was reverted due to regressions.

So all of us are going in right direction 🙂

[situchan]

So in latest main (with !), OptionRow is re-rendered always whenever any prop is changed.
Removing ! will fix 2 bugs:

• this performance issue (re-render) (not noticeable by user)
• this GH (clearly noticeable by user)

[TMisiukiewicz]

PR with this change is open again after fixing regressions: #33347 🙂

[blimpich]

Ah I see, I misunderstood. My App repo is a few days out of date and so when I looked at the git blame locally I was getting out of date information, which made me misunderstand the situation. Thank you for the explanation @situchan.

Looks like #33347 fixes this bug. @TMisiukiewicz can you add this issue to the list of issues fixed by your PR?

[situchan]

I see that PR was already C+ reviewed but I can review again focusing on testing repro step in this GH.

[blimpich]

@situchan That sounds good to me. Assigning @TMisiukiewicz since they have fixed the bug with their PR.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @situchan 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[TMisiukiewicz]

Linked this issue in a PR ✅

[melvin-bot]

@TMisiukiewicz, @trjExpensify, @blimpich, @situchan Eep! 4 days overdue now. Issues have feelings too...

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.17-8 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• (perf) Implement debounce in OptionList search #33347

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-01-03. 🎊

After the hold period is over and BZ checklist items are completed, please complete any of the applicable payments for this issue, and check them off once done.

• External issue reporter
• Contributor that fixed the issue
• Contributor+ that helped on the issue and/or PR

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @TMisiukiewicz does not require payment (Contractor)
• @situchan requires payment automatic offer (Reviewer)

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@situchan] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@situchan] The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake. Link to comment:
• [@situchan] A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner. Link to discussion:
• [@situchan] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@situchan] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@trjExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[trjExpensify]

👋 Checklist time, @situchan!

[situchan]

• The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: migrate: OptionRow to function component #28977
• The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake. Link to comment: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/28977/files#r1440372517
• A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner. Link to discussion: This was purely PR author's mistake and could have been caught earlier during PR review.

We can skip regression test as caught by Applause team

[situchan]

@trjExpensify I think you accidentally closed this issue

[trjExpensify]

I did indeed!

[trjExpensify]

Thanks, settled up $500 with @situchan for the C+ PR review.