Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Display names and profile pictures of some users are not fetched in community channels #17229

Open
pavloburykh opened this issue Sep 8, 2023 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
E:Mobile Bug MVP E:Mobile Community Permissions MVP https://www.notion.so/The-Four-Guards-64e9c0b6bf2546a6bfc3716bc96dc587 mobile-core 🔢 medium prio

Comments

@pavloburykh
Copy link
Contributor

You can follow the below steps for reproduction but mind that those issues can be easily observed if you restore your main account (which is member of Status comm) on mobile, go to any channel in Status community and check mentions list. You will see bunch of users with pub keys with absent profile icons etc.

Preconditions:

  1. User A is mutual contact with User B and User C.
  2. User B and User C are not mutual contacts

Steps:

  1. User A creates community and invites User B and User C
  2. User B joins the community and goes offline
  3. User C joins the community
  4. Open mentions list by User C in #general channel of newly joined community
  5. See which User's B data is fetched for User C

Actual result:

  1. Display name and profile picture of User B are not fetched for User C

User's B data is fetched for User C in one of the following cases:

  1. User C opens profile page of User B
  2. User B goes back online
  3. There is a message from User B in chat which is fetched by User C

On the video below you can observe the described behaviour (User C is from the right part of the screen)

User_C_logs.zip

fetching.display.names.mp4

Additional Information

  • Status version: nightly
  • Operating System: Android, iOS
@ilmotta
Copy link
Contributor

ilmotta commented Nov 16, 2023

@cammellos, @pavloburykh, @churik is this issue still relevant? It's still tagged for 1.26, are we going to move it to 1.27?

@cammellos, are you still working on it or should we leave it open for someone else to pick if we prioritize it?

@cammellos
Copy link
Member

@ilmotta let me get it in shape, I will refresh the PR tomorrow, apologies for the delay

@churik
Copy link
Member

churik commented Nov 27, 2023

I guess it was fixed in status-go, reopen if it still persist

@pavloburykh
Copy link
Contributor Author

pavloburykh commented Feb 5, 2024

I guess it was fixed in status-go, reopen if it still persist

Re-opening the issue as it has not been fixed. Here are the screenshots and video from nightly (Jan 5, 2024) build. Pay attention at mention suggest list and empty mentions within existing message history.

Status-debug-logs (100).zip

photo_2024-02-05 19 43 00

photo_2024-02-05 19 43 03

telegram-cloud-document-2-5334622124940216321.mp4

@qfrank
Copy link
Contributor

qfrank commented Feb 7, 2024

  1. User A creates community and invites User B and User C
  2. User B joins the community and goes offline
  3. User C joins the community
  4. Open mentions list by User C in #general channel of newly joined community
  5. See which User's B data is fetched for User C

Hi @pavloburykh , i followed your steps and reproduced it but maybe a little different i made was to the 2nd step:
User B sent join community request and went offline without waiting the request get accepted from User A.
Should we fix such issue ^ ? cc @cammellos

I'm unable to reproduce this issue if User B wait User A accepted the join request and then goes offline.
image

@pavloburykh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @pavloburykh , i followed your steps and reproduced it but maybe a little different i made was to the 2nd step: User B sent join community request and went offline without waiting the request get accepted from User A. Should we fix such issue ^ ? cc @cammellos

@qfrank thank you for finding correct steps to reproduce the issue locally. At the same time I think there might be some other unknown steps to reproduce the issue. The reason why I think so is that in case described here #17229 (comment) most of community members have broken data. I doubt that all of them went offline without waiting for request got accepted. Moreover, I am sure that they didn't, cause all those community members are our test users and we usually wait for request to be accepted.

I can confirm that most of those test user have joined community, used it for couple of tests and then never come back online. But do we consider such case acceptable? If there is a community member who has been offline for some time - then his data will broken for new members.

@qfrank
Copy link
Contributor

qfrank commented Feb 7, 2024

I was wondering if UserB can publishContactCode with community.MemberUpdateChannelID before joining the community so that UserC won't get such issue. cc @cammellos

@qfrank
Copy link
Contributor

qfrank commented Feb 7, 2024

Moreover, I am sure that they didn't, cause all those community members are our test users and we usually wait for request to be accepted.

If this is the case, proberly i need write a test to try to fetch the contact code messages to see if UserC can receive the full messages. This issue could also be relate to message reliability issue 🤔

@pavloburykh pavloburykh added E:Mobile Community Permissions MVP https://www.notion.so/The-Four-Guards-64e9c0b6bf2546a6bfc3716bc96dc587 E: Mobile Release 2.28 and removed E:Mobile Communities MVP E:Mobile Release 2.27 labels Mar 5, 2024
@churik
Copy link
Member

churik commented Jun 21, 2024

I guess it might have the same roots as #20514 (cross-posting)

@ilmotta
Copy link
Contributor

ilmotta commented Jun 21, 2024

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
E:Mobile Bug MVP E:Mobile Community Permissions MVP https://www.notion.so/The-Four-Guards-64e9c0b6bf2546a6bfc3716bc96dc587 mobile-core 🔢 medium prio
Projects
Status: No status
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants