[HOLD for payment 2024-08-19] [$250] Noticeable Delay When Selecting Assignee During Task Assignment

[izarutskaya]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: v9.0.2-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: N
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): abebemiherat@gmail.com
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Issue reported by: Applause-Internal team

Action Performed:

1. FAB > Assign Task
2. Add title > Go to Assignee
3. Click on Assignee > Select User

Expected Result:

There should be no noticeable delay, and the process should be smooth when selecting an assignee from the dropdown during task assignment

Actual Result:

Noticeable delay when selecting an assignee

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

Bug6525043_1719393634471.Screen_Recording_2024-06-25_at_11.30.08_PM.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0179306ad6d57e7abf
• Upwork Job ID: 1805923850414823822
• Last Price Increase: 2024-07-10

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @dylanexpensify

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @MitchExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mountiny (DeployBlockerCash), see https://stackoverflowteams.com/c/expensify/questions/9980/ for more details.

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[izarutskaya]

@MitchExpensify I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors.

[izarutskaya]

We think this issue might be related to the #vip-vsb

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~0179306ad6d57e7abf

[melvin-bot]

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

[mountiny]

I barely saw som delay in the video, demoting and marking external

[nyomanjyotisa]

Proposal

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

Delay When Selecting Assignee During Task Assignment

What is the root cause of that problem?

App/src/components/SelectionList/BaseSelectionList.tsx

Line 281 in 811f154

const debouncedOnSelectRow = useCallback(lodashDebounce(onSelectRow, 200), [onSelectRow]);

This line of code causes a 200 millis delay when selecting an assignee during task assignment

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

change that code to the following code since we need to keep the onSelectRow not called more than once in 200 millis

    const lastExecutedRef = useRef(0);
    const debouncedOnSelectRow = useCallback((item: TItem) => {
        const now = Date.now();
    
        if (now - lastExecutedRef.current >= 200) {
          onSelectRow(item);
          lastExecutedRef.current = now;
        }
    }, [onSelectRow]);

Result (no delay on selecting assignee and not going back twice on multiple mouse clicks on select Priority mode):
https://github.com/Expensify/App/assets/73281575/60b796d8-87d4-4efa-92d4-124393933fef

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[mountiny]

@huzaifa-99 @parasharrajat this seems to be coming from your PR then. can you have a look please

[parasharrajat]

Yes, looks like it @mountiny. IMO, I see no delay and I thought it is fine on the original PR. @huzaifa-99 any idea on enhancing this?

IMO, this issue should still be counted as an enhancement, not a regression.

[huzaifa-99]

I didn't see any noticeable delays during tests, and IMO this is not a regression.

@huzaifa-99 any idea on enhancing this?

will look into it shortly today.

[parasharrajat]

We initially used that. There is some discussion here #25604 (comment) about it.

[BrtqKr]

ok, it doesn't seem to be happening in the current state of the app, so I guess the PR is ready for the review.

[dylanexpensify]

@mananjadhav for review!

[dylanexpensify]

bump @mananjadhav

[mananjadhav]

I am done with my review and here's the checklist. Waiting on @mountiny but I think he was OOO last week.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.0.18-10 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Fix assign person delay #45874

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-08-19. 🎊

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

• @mananjadhav requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @BrtqKr does not require payment (Contractor)

[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:

• [@mananjadhav] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@mananjadhav] 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:
• [@mananjadhav] 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:
• [@mananjadhav] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@mananjadhav] 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.
• [@dylanexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[dylanexpensify]

Payment coming up!

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

• Reviewer: @mananjadhav owed $250 via NewDot
• Contributor: @BrtqKr is from an agency-contributor and not due payment

BugZero Checklist (@dylanexpensify)

• I have verified the correct assignees and roles are listed above and updated the neccesary manual offers
• I have verified that there are no duplicate or incorrect contracts on Upwork for this job (https://www.upwork.com/ab/applicants/1805923850414823822/hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[mananjadhav]

@dylanexpensify Can you please complete the payout summary?

I don't think we have any offending PR here. We did link a PR earlier but we've been using debounce even before. The existing regression tests for changes from debounce to useSingleExecution should cover the tests. Hence no new tests needed.

[dylanexpensify]

Reviewing today! Apologies for delay!

[dylanexpensify]

Payment summary:

Contributor+: @mananjadhav $250 via NewDot

Please apply/request!

[JmillsExpensify]

$250 approved for @mananjadhav