Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(sanity): relative dates incorrectly appearing to be in the future #8034

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 13, 2024

Conversation

juice49
Copy link
Contributor

@juice49 juice49 commented Dec 13, 2024

Description

It appears React Compiler is failing to see the base comparison date (now) as a dependancy when using useRelativeTime to calculate a relative date. This causes the base comparison date (now) to become stale, resulting in the relative date incorrectly appearing to be in the future.

This affects the History inspector. Changes made externally (e.g. by another editor or the API) after the page loads may appear to be from the future:

image (26)

Spooky! 👻

Switching off auto-memoization for useRelativeTime appears to solve the problem for now.

What to review

  • Does this seem reasonable?

Testing

  1. When viewing a document, open the History inspector.
  2. In another tab, or via the API, mutate the document you are viewing.
  3. In the original tab, the change should never appear to be in the future.

Notes for release

Fixed a bug that could cause relative timestamps, such as those shown in the document history inspector, to incorrectly appear to be in the future.

Copy link

vercel bot commented Dec 13, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
page-building-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Dec 13, 2024 11:36am
performance-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Dec 13, 2024 11:36am
test-next-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Dec 13, 2024 11:36am
test-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Dec 13, 2024 11:36am
1 Skipped Deployment
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
studio-workshop ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Dec 13, 2024 11:36am

@juice49 juice49 marked this pull request as ready for review December 13, 2024 11:34
@juice49 juice49 requested a review from a team as a code owner December 13, 2024 11:34
@juice49 juice49 requested review from rexxars and stipsan and removed request for a team December 13, 2024 11:34
Copy link
Member

@stipsan stipsan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Really interesting case! I'll see if I can fix it properly in a follow up 🤔

Copy link
Contributor

No changes to documentation

@juice49
Copy link
Contributor Author

juice49 commented Dec 13, 2024

@stipsan Thank you! Just wanted to add a bandaid for now, but agree it would be good to understand and fix the root cause.

@juice49 juice49 added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 13, 2024
Merged via the queue into next with commit 3869ede Dec 13, 2024
47 checks passed
@juice49 juice49 deleted the fix/relative-time-memoization branch December 13, 2024 11:39
Copy link
Contributor

⚡️ Editor Performance Report

Updated Fri, 13 Dec 2024 11:45:31 GMT

Benchmark reference
latency of sanity@latest
experiment
latency of this branch
Δ (%)
latency difference
article (title) 25.6 efps (39ms) 27.0 efps (37ms) -2ms (-5.1%)
article (body) 78.1 efps (13ms) 73.0 efps (14ms) +1ms (-/-%)
article (string inside object) 27.0 efps (37ms) 27.0 efps (37ms) +0ms (-/-%)
article (string inside array) 25.0 efps (40ms) 25.0 efps (40ms) +0ms (-/-%)
recipe (name) 50.0 efps (20ms) 50.0 efps (20ms) +0ms (-/-%)
recipe (description) 55.6 efps (18ms) 55.6 efps (18ms) +0ms (-/-%)
recipe (instructions) 99.9+ efps (5ms) 99.9+ efps (5ms) +0ms (-/-%)
synthetic (title) 19.2 efps (52ms) 19.6 efps (51ms) -1ms (-1.9%)
synthetic (string inside object) 20.0 efps (50ms) 19.2 efps (52ms) +2ms (+4.0%)

efps — editor "frames per second". The number of updates assumed to be possible within a second.

Derived from input latency. efps = 1000 / input_latency

Detailed information

🏠 Reference result

The performance result of sanity@latest

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 39ms 46ms 55ms 165ms 159ms 11.8s
article (body) 13ms 15ms 17ms 62ms 184ms 4.7s
article (string inside object) 37ms 40ms 47ms 74ms 246ms 6.7s
article (string inside array) 40ms 42ms 47ms 156ms 168ms 6.9s
recipe (name) 20ms 23ms 26ms 42ms 0ms 6.6s
recipe (description) 18ms 19ms 22ms 39ms 0ms 4.6s
recipe (instructions) 5ms 7ms 8ms 22ms 0ms 3.0s
synthetic (title) 52ms 55ms 63ms 313ms 566ms 13.1s
synthetic (string inside object) 50ms 52ms 63ms 335ms 674ms 8.6s

🧪 Experiment result

The performance result of this branch

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 37ms 40ms 45ms 176ms 163ms 10.1s
article (body) 14ms 15ms 18ms 145ms 191ms 5.0s
article (string inside object) 37ms 41ms 65ms 224ms 395ms 7.0s
article (string inside array) 40ms 43ms 48ms 169ms 138ms 6.9s
recipe (name) 20ms 21ms 24ms 55ms 0ms 6.8s
recipe (description) 18ms 19ms 20ms 29ms 0ms 4.5s
recipe (instructions) 5ms 7ms 8ms 18ms 0ms 3.1s
synthetic (title) 51ms 54ms 57ms 264ms 588ms 14.0s
synthetic (string inside object) 52ms 54ms 65ms 557ms 1013ms 8.6s

📚 Glossary

column definitions

  • benchmark — the name of the test, e.g. "article", followed by the label of the field being measured, e.g. "(title)".
  • latency — the time between when a key was pressed and when it was rendered. derived from a set of samples. the median (p50) is shown to show the most common latency.
  • p75 — the 75th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 75% of the sampled inputs in this benchmark were processed faster than this value. this provides insight into the upper range of typical performance.
  • p90 — the 90th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 90% of the sampled inputs were faster than this. this metric helps identify slower interactions that occurred less frequently during the benchmark.
  • p99 — the 99th percentile of the input latency in the test run. only 1% of sampled inputs were slower than this. this represents the worst-case scenarios encountered during the benchmark, useful for identifying potential performance outliers.
  • blocking time — the total time during which the main thread was blocked, preventing user input and UI updates. this metric helps identify performance bottlenecks that may cause the interface to feel unresponsive.
  • test duration — how long the test run took to complete.

Copy link
Contributor

Component Testing Report Updated Dec 13, 2024 11:45 AM (UTC)

❌ Failed Tests (6) -- expand for details
File Status Duration Passed Skipped Failed
comments/CommentInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 11s 15 0 0
formBuilder/ArrayInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 14s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Annotations.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 40s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPaste.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 56s 11 7 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPasteFields.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 12 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Decorators.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 28s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DisableFocusAndUnset.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 16s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DragAndDrop.spec.tsx ❌ Failed (Inspect) 4m 27s 0 0 6
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/FocusTracking.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 11s 15 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Input.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 2m 53s 21 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/ObjectBlock.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 49s 18 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/PresenceCursors.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 14s 3 9 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/RangeDecoration.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 44s 9 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Styles.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 29s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Toolbar.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 53s 21 0 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditing.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditingNestedObjects.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0

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.

2 participants