[HOLD for payment 2023-05-23] [$2000] System displays a technical error message when handling an error (Auth CreateReportAction returned an error)

[kavimuru]

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

---

Action Performed:

1. Open existing chat
2. Click on “Profile” avatar
3. Click on “Preferences” link
4. Turn on “Simualte failing network request”
5. Click on "+" icon
6. Click on "Add attachment" link
7. Select an image/document/video
8. Click on “send” button
9. Turn off “Simualte failing network request”
10. Open the chat
11. Observe that system displays an error message

Expected Result:

error message should not include technical details, and should include a clear, actionable message only

Actual Result:

system displays a technical error message (Auth CreateReportAction returned an error)

Workaround:

unknown

Platforms:

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

• Android / native
• Android / Chrome
• iOS / native
• iOS / Safari
• MacOS / Chrome / Safari
• MacOS / Desktop

Version Number: 1.2.90-7
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
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation

2023-03-28.11.52.39.mp4

Recording.148.mp4

Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: @Natnael-Guchima
Slack conversation: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C049HHMV9SM/p1679994447012709

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f06dab90106f3c26
• Upwork Job ID: 1643030950824513536
• Last Price Increase: 2023-04-19

[MelvinBot]

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

[MelvinBot]

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

[MitchExpensify]

Can't test because site is down currently, will test once I can

[MitchExpensify]

I am unable to reproduce this using the steps above

[Natnael-Guchima]

2023-04-02.20.15.34.mp4

I am able to reproduce the issue.

[MitchExpensify]

Got it this time!

[MelvinBot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01f06dab90106f3c26

[MelvinBot]

Current assignee @MitchExpensify is eligible for the External assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[MelvinBot]

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

[MelvinBot]

Triggered auto assignment to @johnmlee101 (External), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[alitoshmatov]

Seems like it is making the same request even if the first request was successful

[hellohublot]

Proposal

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

System displays a technical error message when handling an error (Auth CreateReportAction returned an error)

What is the root cause of that problem?

The error reported by the server is an onyx id conflict, because the network request has already been sent

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

We should not send this network request

App/src/libs/HttpUtils.js

Line 43 in df10eeb

+    if (shouldFailAllRequests || shouldForceOffline) {
+        return Promise.reject(new HttpsError({ 
+               message: CONST.ERROR.FAILED_TO_FETCH 
+        })
+    }
+

App/src/libs/HttpUtils.js

Lines 52 to 56 in df10eeb

	if (shouldFailAllRequests || shouldForceOffline) {
	throw new HttpsError({
	message: CONST.ERROR.FAILED_TO_FETCH,
	});
	}

-        if (shouldFailAllRequests || shouldForceOffline) {
-            throw new HttpsError({
-                message: CONST.ERROR.FAILED_TO_FETCH,
-            });
-        }

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Not Yet

[Santhosh-Sellavel]

@johnmlee101
This is not a valid bug, and does not need to be fixed. shouldForceOffline or shouldFailAllRequests does not really stop anything from happening. In fact, all requests get succeeded only the client does not get updated. Those options are used only for testing/dev purposes and do not affect the product. So we can close this one.

cc: @MitchExpensify

[Natnael-Guchima]

@Santhosh-Sellavel, I thought the feature in staging is used to simulate a real life situation that would happen if the user has a failing network. If that is the case, the user is currently seeing a technical error message that talks about a code module if system throws an error. It is like seeing a console log error on the UI. The normal trend of error handling is to display clear actionable message. In this case the error message excluding the phrase: "Auth CreateReportAction returned an error"

[Natnael-Guchima]

To make things clear. When system throws an error while user is trying to attach a file, the error should be:

Expected Result: Unexpected error while posting the comment. Please try again later.

Actual Result: Unexpected error while posting the comment. Please try again later. Auth CreateReportAction returned an error

[johnmlee101]

@Santhosh-Sellavel so you're saying this is purely a bug with our own internal flags for testing? Is there a way to better simulate failures without introducing bugs that wouldn't be visible if this happened on production?

[Natnael-Guchima]

The same error message is displayed in production when the system throws an error message while a user is trying to attach an image. It is a bit hard to reproduce attachment failure in prod though.

[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 1.3.14-14 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Prevent duplicate requests on network failure #18237

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2023-05-23. 🎊

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

As a reminder, here are the bonuses/penalties that should be applied for any External issue:

• Merged PR within 3 business days of assignment - 50% bonus
• Merged PR more than 9 business days after assignment - 50% penalty

[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:

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

[jjcoffee]

@MitchExpensify Gentle bump for payment on this one.

[MitchExpensify]

Offer sent for payment @jjcoffee and your "appeal" makes sense to me, I will not apply to 50% within 9 days merge penalty

[jjcoffee]

Thanks @MitchExpensify! Offer accepted.

[Natnael-Guchima]

@MitchExpensify a gentle bump to settle payments.

Thanks

[melvin-bot]

@johnmlee101, @jjcoffee, @MitchExpensify, @Santhosh-Sellavel Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!

[Santhosh-Sellavel]

Not overdue only Checklist & payment is left out

[MitchExpensify]

All paid and contracts ended - Thanks!

[MitchExpensify]

Bump on these next steps @Santhosh-Sellavel #16637 (comment)

[Santhosh-Sellavel]

I had this on my list but caught up with priority items. Will try and get it done this week

[MitchExpensify]

Not critically overdue, @Santhosh-Sellavel has this on their radar

[Santhosh-Sellavel]

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:

• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR: Block SequentialQueue on reauthentication. Reorganize Network / Reauthentication code. #8742
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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: Block SequentialQueue on reauthentication. Reorganize Network / Reauthentication code. #8742 (comment)
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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:
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@Santhosh-Sellavel] 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.
• [@MitchExpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

@johnmlee101 Kind of an edge case, so regression test not need here let me know your thoughts thanks!

[MitchExpensify]

@johnmlee101 Friendly bump to avoid to the overdue overlords and close this one out potentially 😄

[johnmlee101]

Yeah we can avoid regressions for this I think

[MitchExpensify]

Thanks everyone, closing!