Skip to content

Perf/optimize get all with json aggregation#805

Merged
roryabraham merged 3 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/optimize-getAll-with-json-aggregation
Jul 7, 2026
Merged

Perf/optimize get all with json aggregation#805
roryabraham merged 3 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:perf/optimize-getAll-with-json-aggregation

Conversation

@rinej

@rinej rinej commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Details

Previously getAll() fetched every row from keyvaluepairs and ran JSON.parse once per row (N parses) to hydrate the Onyx cache at startup. It now asks SQLite to aggregate the whole table into a single JSON string.

  • Native-only - getAll() resolves to SQLiteProvider on iOS/Android. Web (IDBKeyValProvider) is unaffected.
  • Runs on the cold-start cache hydration path
  • Perf gain is modest on real accounts (~11%, within noise)

Related Issues

Expensify/App#89652 (comment)

Linked E/App PR

Expensify/App#95511

Automated Tests

  • Added unit tests

Manual Tests

  • Sign in on native, let the app fully sync
  • Background the app and force-kill it (swipe away / kill process).
  • Cold launch the app
  • Verify:
    • LHN fully populates - same report list, order, unread/pinned states as before
    • Open several reports (chat, expense, workspace) - all messages, amounts, avatars render correctly
    • Open Settings - Workspaces - Profile - Wallet - all persisted data present
    • No missing, duplicated, or blank data

Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Related Issues section above
  • I linked the corresponding Expensify/App PR in the ### Linked E/App PR section above, and verified this change against it (E/App CI passed and manual testing completed)
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Details
Android-getAll-Perf.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS-getAll-Perf.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

@rinej rinej force-pushed the perf/optimize-getAll-with-json-aggregation branch from 8adca98 to cbf2c70 Compare July 7, 2026 16:04
@rinej rinej marked this pull request as ready for review July 7, 2026 16:33
@rinej rinej requested a review from a team as a code owner July 7, 2026 16:33
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from amyevans and removed request for a team July 7, 2026 16:33
Comment thread lib/storage/providers/SQLiteProvider.ts Outdated
// time. Since record_key is the primary key, the rows already come back sorted by key,
// so ordering by record_key costs almost nothing.
return provider.store
.executeAsync<{aggregated: string | null}>('SELECT json_group_array(json_array(record_key, json(valueJSON))) AS aggregated FROM keyvaluepairs ORDER BY record_key;')

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the ORDER BY record_key needed for anything?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As mentioned in the comment, it's not strictly necessary - it's only there for readability. Since it's part of the primary key, it's optional. I can remove it and shorten the comment as well

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

done ✅

@amyevans amyevans left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@amyevans amyevans requested a review from roryabraham July 7, 2026 17:41
@roryabraham roryabraham merged commit 335fb74 into Expensify:main Jul 7, 2026
11 checks passed
@os-botify

os-botify Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Published to npm in 3.0.91 🎉

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.

4 participants