[HOLD for payment 2024-06-20] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-18] [HIGH] [API Reliability] The app assumes its offline when its on spotty connection

[mountiny]

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:
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:
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C05LX9D6E07/p1717393020259779

Action Performed:

Break down in numbered steps

'm on a pretty good wifi network in that I can access the web normally for almost everything else. But I can't get online with NewDot -- and it doesn't really seem to be trying. I'm in a hotel so I feel like maybe it took a second to get through the wifi authentication, and perhaps it tried once and failed, and now it's not trying again? I would think that it should try every minute or so even when it thinks it can't connect. I'm going to try to refresh to see if that fixes it... Yep, refresh fixed it. So I think retrying every minute or so would also "fix" this

Expected Result:

Describe what you think should've happened

Actual Result:

Describe what actually happened

Workaround:

Can the user still use Expensify without this being fixed? Have you informed them of the workaround?

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

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @JmillsExpensify

[melvin-bot]

Unable to auto-create job on Upwork. The BZ team member should create it manually for this issue.

[melvin-bot]

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

[adhorodyski]

Adam from Callstack, happy to look into it

[adhorodyski]

I'm afraid we can't find the root cause here (easily) - I wasn't able to reproduce this in any way, the net-info module works as expected and picks up any changes well for me.

What do we mean by retrying every minute or so would also "fix" this? Do I get this right that we can call NetInfo's refresh method inside of this if statement? This should notify all the subscribers (it runs every 60s) and eventually switch back to the 'online' state that will get reflected on the UI. I can't imagine how we will test this though in a real life apart from seeing that it will re-check the connection state.

const intervalID = setInterval(() => {
        // Offline status also implies backend unreachability
        if (isOffline) {
+            NetInfo.refresh();
            return;
        }

Overall, I see the lack of components <-> remote data bounding being problematic here as we have to manually tell when to re-fire requests - this works as expected for failing ones.

@mountiny I will open up a PR with this update tomorrow morning, I think we can test a build against this behaviour, see if it retries picking up the connection correctly.

[melvin-bot]

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

[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 1.4.81-11 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: call net info refresh on each reachability check #43090

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-18. 🎊

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

• @parasharrajat requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @adhorodyski 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:

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

[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 1.4.82-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: call net info refresh on each reachability check #43090

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-06-20. 🎊

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

• @parasharrajat requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @adhorodyski 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:

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

[parasharrajat]

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:

• [@parasharrajat] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: **Cause for this issue is unknown. **
• [@parasharrajat] 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: NA
• [@parasharrajat] 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: Not needed
• [@parasharrajat] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug. No
• [@parasharrajat] 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.

Regression Test Steps

1. Log in and go offline (simulate this using Chrome's devtools Network tab)
2. See this server log appearing every 60s: [NetworkStatus] Rechecking the network connection with "isOffline" set to "true" to double-check internet reachability.

Do you agree 👍 or 👎 ?

[techievivek]

Looks good to me. @JmillsExpensify can we get this added to testRail? thanks.

[melvin-bot]

Payment Summary

Upwork Job

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

BugZero Checklist (@JmillsExpensify)

• 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//hired)
• I have paid out the Upwork contracts or cancelled the ones that are incorrect
• I have verified the payment summary above is correct

[parasharrajat]

I believe it should be 500 as it is a high-priority issue.

[melvin-bot]

@JmillsExpensify, @parasharrajat, @techievivek, @adhorodyski Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[techievivek]

Not overdue. @mountiny, can you please confirm/clarify the bounty for this GH? Thanks.

[mountiny]

I think $500 for the HIGH newdot-quality task is reasonable, we need to encourage people to work on these

[techievivek]

Thanks, that makes sense. @JmillsExpensify can we please issue the payment here?

[melvin-bot]

@JmillsExpensify, @parasharrajat, @techievivek, @adhorodyski Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[parasharrajat]

Payment requested as per #42988 (comment)

[techievivek]

Not overdue, waiting for payment to complete. CC @JmillsExpensify

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 approved for @parasharrajat

[JmillsExpensify]

Contract paid out and regression test created, so I'm closing out this issue.