Skip to content

refactor: store acrtive calls state in memory#4149

Open
MohamadJaara wants to merge 3 commits into
developfrom
mo/feat/in-memory-active-calls
Open

refactor: store acrtive calls state in memory#4149
MohamadJaara wants to merge 3 commits into
developfrom
mo/feat/in-memory-active-calls

Conversation

@MohamadJaara
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@MohamadJaara MohamadJaara commented May 19, 2026

rn active calls are stored in DB which means on app init we need to clear them from memory doing not needed work

this data should be in memory only and this is a POC of how this can look like it can be improved but first want to create a POC

@MohamadJaara MohamadJaara requested a review from saleniuk May 19, 2026 07:32
@MohamadJaara MohamadJaara force-pushed the mo/feat/in-memory-active-calls branch from 03d2df4 to c36d3bc Compare May 19, 2026 15:02
@MohamadJaara MohamadJaara changed the title poc: store acrtive calls state in memory refactor: store acrtive calls state in memory May 19, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2026

Test Results

0 tests   - 4 934   0 ✅  - 4 819   0s ⏱️ - 3m 3s
0 suites  -   810   0 💤  -   115 
0 files    -   810   0 ❌ ±    0 

Results for commit b22345e. ± Comparison against base commit 96241b8.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2026

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchmo/feat/in-memory-active-calls
Testbedubuntu-latest

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencymicroseconds (µs)
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.logic.CoreLogicBenchmark.createObjectInFiles📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
876.64 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.logic.CoreLogicBenchmark.createObjectInMemory📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
343,536.47 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.inboxPagingDeepPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
126,255.08 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.inboxPagingFirstPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
122,360.90 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.localMarkAsReadBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
3,269.81 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.messagePagingDeepPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
27,271.89 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessageReadBenchmark.messagePagingFirstPageBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
11,262.02 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessagesNoPragmaTuneBenchmark.messageInsertionBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1,242,185.06 µs
com.wire.kalium.benchmarks.persistence.MessagesNoPragmaTuneBenchmark.queryMessagesBenchmark📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
20,440.76 µs
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@MohamadJaara MohamadJaara force-pushed the mo/feat/in-memory-active-calls branch from e9d6c97 to b22345e Compare May 19, 2026 19:37
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link
Copy Markdown

WHEN :newActivitiesOnTop THEN
CASE WHEN qualifiedId IN :activeCallConversationIds THEN 1 ELSE hasNewActivitiesToShow END
ELSE 0
END DESC,
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

for now this is needed just for order but moving forward we can change this to not move a conv to the top of the list because of calls

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant