[HOLD #48400][$250] Expense - RBR doesn't disappear Instantly after paying held expense

[IuliiaHerets]

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: 9.0.27-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to https://staging.new.expensify.com/
2. As User A, go to the chat with User B.
3. As User A, submit an expense.
4. As User A, right-click on the expense and click "Hold."
5. The RBR appears in the expense preview for both User A and User B. If not, go to the expense details and then return to the chat.
6. As User B, click "Pay Elsewhere" and confirm the payment.
7. Click on the expense preview and then return to the chat (repeat this for both User A and User B).

Expected Result:

After paying the held expense in step 6, the RBR in the preview should disappear instantly.

Actual Result:

After paying the held expense in step 6, the RBR in the preview persists. The red dot only disappears after clicking on the preview and returning to the chat.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

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

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6589914_1725218970132.1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021831729851068678041
• Upwork Job ID: 1831729851068678041
• Last Price Increase: 2024-09-19
• Automatic offers:
• ikevin127 | Reviewer | 104042668
• nkdengineer | Contributor | 104042669

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @twisterdotcom

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @twisterdotcom (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.

[IuliiaHerets]

We think that this bug might be related to #vip-bills

[IuliiaHerets]

@twisterdotcom FYI 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

[Nodebrute]

Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2024-09-02 13:47:25 UTC.

Proposal

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

RBR doesn't disappear Instantly after paying held expense

What is the root cause of that problem?

In getPayMoneyRequestParams, we unhold transactions when we process a payment, but we don't clear transaction violation("hold"). This is why we're still seeing RBR.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 6725 to 6734 in 9aca655

	for (const transaction of reportTransactions) {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${transaction.transactionID}`,
	value: {
	comment: {
	hold: null,
	},
	},
	});

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

We should also clear the transaction violation "hold" here. We can do something like this

            const transactionViolations = allTransactionViolations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`]
optimisticData.push({
                onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
                key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${transaction.transactionID}`,
                value: transactionViolations?.filter((violation) => violation.name !== CONST.VIOLATIONS.HOLD) ?? []
            })

We also need to include failure data here.

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[twisterdotcom]

Yes, I recreated this.

rbr.expense.mp4

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021831729851068678041

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @abdulrahuman5196 (External)

[nkdengineer]

Proposal

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

After paying the held expense in step 6, the RBR in the preview persists. The red dot only disappears after clicking on the preview and returning to the chat.

What is the root cause of that problem?

When we pay money request, we unhold all transactions. But we don't clear the hold violation in optimistic data and after the API is complete, BE also doesn't clear the hold violation of the transaction then RBR still displays.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 6725 to 6734 in 65c0f41

	if (full) {
	const reportTransactions = TransactionUtils.getAllReportTransactions(iouReport.reportID);
	for (const transaction of reportTransactions) {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${transaction.transactionID}`,
	value: {
	comment: {
	hold: null,
	},

This bug also happens when we approve money request but it only happens in offline, after the API is complete, BE returns violation of transaction that cleared the hold violation

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 7018 to 7023 in 65c0f41

	heldTransactions.forEach((heldTransaction) => {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
	value: {
	comment: {

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

We should clear the hold violation when we pay/approve all requests. To prevent duplicate code, we can create a util to get the optimistic data for this case

function buildOnyxDataForUnHoldTransaction(expenseReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report>) {
    const optimisticData: OnyxUpdate[] = [];
    const failureData: OnyxUpdate[] = [];

    const heldTransactions = ReportUtils.getAllHeldTransactions(expenseReport?.reportID);
    heldTransactions.forEach((heldTransaction) => {
        optimisticData.push({
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
            value: {
                comment: {
                    hold: '',
                },
            },
        });
        failureData.push({
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
            value: {
                comment: {
                    hold: heldTransaction.comment?.hold,
                },
            },
        });
        const transactionViolations = allTransactionViolations[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`] ?? []
        optimisticData.push({
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
            value: transactionViolations.filter((violation) => violation.name !== CONST.VIOLATIONS.HOLD)
        });
        failureData.push({
            onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.SET,
            key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION_VIOLATIONS}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
            value: transactionViolations,
        });
    });

    return {optimisticData, failureData};
}

Then we can use this in both places here

if (full) {
    const unholdTransactionOnyxData = buildOnyxDataForUnHoldTransaction(iouReport);
    optimisticData.push(...unholdTransactionOnyxData.optimisticData);
    failureData.push(...unholdTransactionOnyxData.failureData);
}

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 6725 to 6734 in 65c0f41

	if (full) {
	const reportTransactions = TransactionUtils.getAllReportTransactions(iouReport.reportID);
	for (const transaction of reportTransactions) {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${transaction.transactionID}`,
	value: {
	comment: {
	hold: null,
	},

if (full && hasHeldExpenses) {
    const unholdTransactionOnyxData = buildOnyxDataForUnHoldTransaction(expenseReport);
    optimisticData.push(...unholdTransactionOnyxData.optimisticData);
    failureData.push(...unholdTransactionOnyxData.failureData);
}

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 7018 to 7023 in 65c0f41

	heldTransactions.forEach((heldTransaction) => {
	optimisticData.push({
	onyxMethod: Onyx.METHOD.MERGE,
	key: `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${heldTransaction.transactionID}`,
	value: {
	comment: {

OPTIONAL: BE should also clear the hold violation when returning the data in PayMoneyRequest API

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom, @abdulrahuman5196 Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[twisterdotcom]

@abdulrahuman5196 how are we doing on the reviews here?

[melvin-bot]

📣 It's been a week! Do we have any satisfactory proposals yet? Do we need to adjust the bounty for this issue? 💸

[abdulrahuman5196]

Hi @twisterdotcom, I am having multiple items on my plate. Kindly assign it to a different C+. Unassigning myself.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @ikevin127 (External)

[melvin-bot]

📣 @ikevin127 🎉 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

[melvin-bot]

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

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[cead22]

@thienlnam this might be a duplicate of #48400. I think we should fix it now, and if it's a dupe we can handle it in that other issue

[thienlnam]

Ah yeah, actually this does look like a dupe and the other issue already has an assignee

[nkdengineer]

@cead22 I think we should clear the hold violation in optimistic data if we paid full instead of adding !isSettled condition.

[ikevin127]

There's a 3rd dupe of this issue that might be fixed in similar fashion, only difference being it's a split instead of hold:

• HOLD #48400 [$250] Red dot (RBR) doesn't go away even though this split expense has been paid/settled ("paid elsewhere") by all parties #48423

Please confirm if this would be fixed by selected proposal from #48400 so we know whether to close it.

[melvin-bot]

@twisterdotcom, @thienlnam, @ikevin127 Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[thienlnam]

@ikevin127 That looks like it would also be solved by #48400

The steps don't look reproducible because it's probably because the expense needs to have a violation

[melvin-bot]

This issue has not been updated in over 15 days. @twisterdotcom, @thienlnam, @ikevin127 eroding to Monthly issue.

P.S. Is everyone reading this sure this is really a near-term priority? Be brave: if you disagree, go ahead and close it out. If someone disagrees, they'll reopen it, and if they don't: one less thing to do!

[twisterdotcom]

#48400 is closed now so I'll try to retest this.

[ikevin127]

Retesting.

[twisterdotcom]

Yeah, fixed.

48397.mp4