Skip to content

Store queued upload files in Cache Storage to fix web InvalidBlob#96493

Draft
elirangoshen wants to merge 1 commit into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:eliran/2397-web-upload-cache-storage
Draft

Store queued upload files in Cache Storage to fix web InvalidBlob#96493
elirangoshen wants to merge 1 commit into
Expensify:mainfrom
callstack-internal:eliran/2397-web-upload-cache-storage

Conversation

@elirangoshen

@elirangoshen elirangoshen commented Jul 20, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

This fixes the web root cause behind the DataError: Failed to write blobs (InvalidBlob) storm tracked in callstack-internal/expensify-issues#2397.

When a receipt file-upload is queued for the offline request queue on web, the file bytes sat inline in the single networkRequestQueue IndexedDB record. As file requests accumulated, that record exceeded Chromium's IndexedDB blob-externalization limit and the write failed — deadlocking the queue so it could never drain. The result was a self-reinforcing retry + log storm, observed on Windows/Chromium clients with queues thousands of requests deep.

This PR takes the file bytes out of the queue entirely. On enqueue, each inline File/Blob is written to a dedicated file store and replaced in the request with a small QueuedFileRef; at send time the ref is resolved back into the bytes. This keeps the queue record tiny and lets a queued upload survive a browser restart.

The file store is backed by the Cache Storage API. Cache Storage uses a different Chromium disk backend than IndexedDB blob externalization, so it avoids the failing write path, and it mirrors src/libs/actions/Attachment/index.ts, which already caches receipt-class binaries (same file sizes and types) in Cache Storage in production. Native is unaffected — it keeps a filesystem uri, and the QueuedFileStorage native stub is a no-op.

Changes:

  • src/libs/QueuedFileStorage/ — new platform-split module. Web (index.ts) stores each blob in Cache Storage (caches.open / put / match / delete / keys) under a synthetic same-origin URL, preserving MIME type via a Content-Type header; storeFile logs via Log.alert on failure so prod telemetry surfaces the failure rate. Native (index.native.ts) is a no-op stub.
  • src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts — swap inline files for a QueuedFileRef on enqueue; purge the store on Onyx.clear() (logout/reset) and delete a request's stored file on terminal outcomes; startup orphan-sweep.
  • src/libs/prepareRequestPayload/index.ts — resolve a QueuedFileRef back into its blob when building the upload; if the file is gone, send without it for a definitive outcome.
  • tests/unit/PersistedRequests.ts — added minimal in-memory Cache Storage + Response mocks (jsdom provides neither); 17 tests pass.

Validation done locally: npm run fmt, npm run lint-changed (exit 0), npm run typecheck-tsgo (0 errors), unit tests 17/17 pass.

Fixed Issues

$#87844
$#87871
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  1. On web, go offline.
  2. Create an expense with a receipt image (optionally create several to queue multiple receipts).
  3. Confirm the request is queued.
  4. Reload the browser while still offline, and confirm the queued upload survives the reload.
  5. Go back online and confirm the receipt uploads successfully and the queue drains.
  6. Verify no Failed to write blobs / InvalidBlob errors appear in the JS console.
  7. Repeat steps 2–6 with multiple queued receipts.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. With the browser offline, create an expense with a receipt image and confirm it is queued (not sent).
  2. Reload the browser while still offline and confirm the queued upload persists.
  3. Restore the network connection and confirm the queued receipt uploads successfully and the queue drains with no Failed to write blobs / InvalidBlob errors.

QA Steps

Same as Tests.

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • 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: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb 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 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 any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • 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)
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • 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 PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • 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.

Screenshots/Videos

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

@elirangoshen
elirangoshen force-pushed the eliran/2397-web-upload-cache-storage branch 3 times, most recently from 37dffd6 to bb61bd5 Compare July 20, 2026 15:48
@elirangoshen

elirangoshen commented Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@elirangoshen
elirangoshen force-pushed the eliran/2397-web-upload-cache-storage branch from bb61bd5 to 963b4de Compare July 21, 2026 09:24
chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]
chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 21, 2026
View reviewed changes

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bb61bd531b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts Outdated
Comment thread src/libs/prepareRequestPayload/index.ts
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 21, 2026 •
edited by github-actions Bot
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/libs/QueuedFileStorage/index.native.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/QueuedFileStorage/types.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/QueuedFileStorage/index.ts 89.58% <89.58%> (ø)
src/libs/actions/PersistedRequests.ts 84.55% <91.80%> (+2.54%) ⬆️
src/libs/prepareRequestPayload/index.ts 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 151 files with indirect coverage changes

@elirangoshen @claude
Store queued upload files in Cache Storage to fix web InvalidBlob
f63be9f 
Queuing a receipt upload for the offline queue on web wrote the file
bytes inline into the single networkRequestQueue IndexedDB record. As
file requests accumulated the record exceeded Chromium's IDB
blob-externalization limit and the write failed with
`DataError: Failed to write blobs`, deadlocking the queue so it could
never drain (a self-reinforcing retry + log storm).

Take the bytes out of the queue: on enqueue each inline File/Blob is
written to a dedicated file store and replaced with a small
QueuedFileRef; at send time the ref is resolved back into the bytes. The
queue record stays tiny and queued uploads survive a browser restart.

The store is backed by the Cache Storage API, which uses a different
Chromium disk backend than IDB blob externalization (avoiding the
failing write path) and mirrors Attachment/index.ts, which already
caches receipt-class binaries there in prod. Native keeps a filesystem
uri and uses a no-op stub. storeFile logs on failure for prod telemetry.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@elirangoshen
elirangoshen force-pushed the eliran/2397-web-upload-cache-storage branch from 963b4de to f63be9f Compare July 21, 2026 09:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] chatgpt-codex-connector[bot] left review comments

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@elirangoshen elirangoshen

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@elirangoshen