fix: maintainer queue pagination with in-SQL filters and exact counts

[ionfwsrijan]

Fix: Maintainer Queue Pagination with In-SQL Filters and Exact Counts (#863)

Problem

getMaintainerPrQueue applied author-level and AI-flag filters in-app after pulling a 100-row DB window, so the offset math produced empty pages and hid rows beyond offset 100. getMaintainerIssueQueue windowed the DB read with .range() before bucket classification (which happens in-app), making matching rows past the window unreachable. Both hasMore flags were guessed from a full window.

Changes

• src/app/actions/maintainer/queue.ts
  • getMaintainerPrQueue: author-level filters are pushed into SQL via a profiles pre-query (level >= minContributorLevel, level IN authorLevel) joined through .or('author_user_id.in.(...),author_user_id.is.null'); the in-app post-join filtering is removed. The query now uses { count: 'exact' } and hasMore = startIdx + PAGE_SIZE < total, so pagination windows only contain rows the maintainer wants and hasMore is exact.
  • getMaintainerIssueQueue: removed the DB .range() window — the full candidate set (bounded by the maintainer's own repos) is read, classified in-app, and sliced with a plain page offset; hasMore derives from the exact in-memory length.
• Tests: new src/app/actions/maintainer/queue.test.ts covering exact counts, SQL author filters, and null-author handling at level 0; maintainer.test.ts updated for the in-SQL filter behavior.

Impact

Every page of the maintainer issue/PR queue is correct — no empty pages, no hidden rows past offset 100, and reliable hasMore.

Closes #863

[vercel]

@ionfwsrijan is attempting to deploy a commit to the codersogs-3057's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[github-actions]

Hey @ionfwsrijan

You have 5 open PRs right now. The limit is 3 at a time.

Please get your existing PRs merged or closed before opening new ones:

• fix: never drop webhooks and reconcile missed merge XP  #867 - fix: never drop webhooks and reconcile missed merge XP
• fix: fail closed when no shared cache is configured in production #866 - fix: fail closed when no shared cache is configured in production
• fix: bound issues-sweep cost with per-repo checkpoints and cooldown  #865 - fix: bound issues-sweep cost with per-repo checkpoints and cooldown
• fix: route sync PRs/calendar through Octokit install client #864 - fix: route sync PRs/calendar through Octokit install client

This PR will remain open but won't be reviewed until you're under the limit. See our Contributing Guidelines for details.

[ionfwsrijan]

@Soumya-codr @codersogs-code Please review this

[ionfwsrijan]

@jakharmonika364

[Ayush4958]

LGTM !!!

[ionfwsrijan]

@Ayush4958 Can we merge this then?

[Ayush4958]

@Ayush4958 Can we merge this then?

I am reviewer so I had to review the pr from my end
I don't have merge access, I have reviewer access
Maintainer will review this PR from their end also