In impress-2020, we do a big slow query to figure out which users have
been active in trades recently. Now, we cache that timestamp on the
User model.
This won't have any immediate effect; it's to clear the way for Classic
DTI to receive the better trade ratios feature people like from 2020.
I also added some unit testing infra because I finally wanted it! for
all the ways you can trigger this timestamp lol
Note too that this is a bit of an unusually complex migration, but my
hope is that the batching and query structure and such helps it run
surprisingly fast! 🤞
This came in a few parts!
1. Add meta tags to let us know we're logged in.
2. Install React Query, which has the data-loading sensibilities I like
about Apollo without the GraphQL that has honestly been a drag.
3. Replace the outfit-loading and outfit-saving calls with API calls to
the main app.
4. Update the main app's API calls to use our more flexible data
constructs like "pose".
Would've loved to do this more incrementally, but it's hard to! You
can't split out outfit-loading and outfit-saving, or auth from any of
that, or the state gets all out-of-sorts.
Still, this is a good nugget we've pulled out all-in-all, and one that
people have been asking for! Can maybe look to logged-in item search
soon too, for own/want data?
I noticed this was stopping changing your default list visibility bc contact neopets connection can't be empty, so I fixed that!
And then I just decided to scroll through every `belongs_to` relationship and add optional to the ones that jumped out at me lol
This removes login/logout/session logic for integrating with OpenNeo ID, replacing them with stubs that just redirect to `/?TODO` when you click login, and helpers that act as if you're not logged in.
This gives us a clean slate to plug in new Devise logic to integrate with the `openneo_id` database directly!
Some important little upgrades but mostly straightforward!
Note that there's still a known issue where item searches crash, I was hoping that this was a bug in Rails 4.2 that would be fixed on upgading to 5, but nope, oh well!
Also uhh I just got a bit silly and didn't actually mean to go all the way to 5.2 in one go, I had meant to start at 5.0… but tbh the 5.1 and 5.2 changes seem small, and this seems to be working, so. Yeah ok let's roll!
Ohh ok, without this change all of our `scope`s were just immediately evaluating the argument and fetching _all_ such matching records immediately, instead of waiting to actually be called. This led to bugs like `pet_type.as_json` returning ALL pet states in the whole db, because the `PetState.emotion_order` scope was being treated as a single predefined query, rather than a query fragment to merge into the current context.
This also explains what happened in 724ed83: that's why things before the scope in the query were being ignored.
I've been doing this manually via email for a long time,
since building new stuff in the logged-in world was a pain in the old env.
But now here we are! Finally, finally :)
Some lame benchmarking on my box, dev, cache classes, many items:
No proxies:
Fresh JSON: 175, 90, 90, 93, 82, 88, 158, 150, 85, 167 = 117.8
Cached JSON: (none)
Fresh HTML: 371, 327, 355, 328, 322, 346 = 341.5
Cached HTML: 173, 123, 175, 187, 171, 179 = 168
Proxies:
Fresh JSON: 175, 183, 269, 219, 195, 178 = 203.17
Cached JSON: 88, 70, 89, 162, 80, 77 = 94.3
Fresh HTML: 494, 381, 350, 334, 451, 372 = 397
Cached HTML: 176, 170, 104, 101, 111, 116 = 129.7
So, overhead is significant, but the gains when cached (and that should be
all the time, since we currently have 0 evictions) are definitely worth
it. Worth pushing, and probably putting some future effort into reducing
overhead.
On production (again, lame), items#index was consistently averaging
73-74ms when super healthy, and 82ms when pets#index was being louder
than usual. For reference is all. This will probably perform
significantly worse at first (in JSON, anyway, since HTML is already
mostly cached), so it might be worth briefly warming the cache after
pushing.
dependent contributables would only count as contributed if their parent
was being contributed for the first time, too. the trick was to delay
actually *assigning* them to their parents until the very, very end
