Skip to content

fix(dashboard): explain model inventory timeouts - #3376

Closed
tang-vu wants to merge 2 commits into
Osmantic:public-betafrom
tang-vu:fix/models-timeout-message
Closed

tang-vu wants to merge 2 commits into
Osmantic:public-betafrom
tang-vu:fix/models-timeout-message

Conversation

@tang-vu

@tang-vu tang-vu commented Aug 27, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Turn the model-inventory request deadline into actionable dashboard guidance.

Why this matters

During a slow model-service startup, Models currently displays a raw browser abort error that does not explain whether loading or an operator action is needed.

Root cause: The hook copies AbortError.message directly into the model inventory error surface.

Behavioral invariant: An inventory deadline identifies the timed-out operation and its 30-second budget; other failures retain their actual message.

Implementation and compatibility

Map abort failures to a concrete inventory timeout message with retry and Dashboard API log guidance. Preserve beta's operation deadlines, cancelled activation ownership and stale-request guards.

This updates the original canonical PR onto public-beta at 3c186f3f12ba21dad7b7266ec5449393529abb00; it does not create a competing replacement. The shared browser code applies to Linux, macOS and Windows installations. There is no persisted schema migration. Rollback is a revert/rebuild of the dashboard; server lifecycle and authorization remain backend-owned.

Overlap check

Searched open and closed upstream PRs by semantic keywords and inspected the complete 1,010-entry public-beta changed-file index on 2026-09-16. Searched production paths: ods/extensions/services/dashboard/src/hooks/useModels.js.

Relevant same-file results: #4396 (open: feat(identity): make assistant naming generic and configurable), #5299 (merged: fix(models): honor runtime operation deadlines in the dashboard), #4962 (merged: fix(models): stop activation polling after leaving the page), #4557 (merged: fix(models): confirm activation with the current inventory)

#5299 handles runtime mutation deadlines, #4962 handles activation cleanup and #4557 proves activation from inventory. This canonical #3376 changes the read-timeout explanation, not those mutation contracts.

Regression and validation

Candidate commit: 4f9cb520d93812c6653bdb17c79c6e2d9beb4267.

  • From ods/extensions/services/dashboard: npx vitest run src/hooks/__tests__/useModels src/pages/Models — 93 passed.
  • The timed-out inventory guidance assertion fails against baseline source; all 93 candidate inventory, model action and activation tests pass.
  • Changed-file ESLint, git diff --check, and pre-commit secret/private-key/large-file checks pass. Existing lint warnings are not errors.
  • Clean beta baseline: full dashboard 1,232 tests passed, lint and production build passed on Windows Node 24.14.1. CI uses Node 20 and validates Linux/macOS/Windows. No browser-on-hardware or live GPU/model-service claim is made by these mocked HTTP/UI tests.
  • Broad make gate on a Linux-native clean beta checkout stops at the existing no-sudo Docker fallback contract (2 failures under the root test environment). The Windows-mounted copy additionally exposed CRLF-sensitive Hermes fixture assertions. Full-tree pre-commit finds existing dummy private-key test fixtures and Windows lacks awk for the heredoc hook; the candidate's scoped secret/key/size hooks pass. These limitations are not represented as successful runtime validation.

Review readiness and batch integration

Implementation and focused checks are complete; this PR is Ready for independent review. CI limits below remain visible and no upstream merge or deployment has been performed.

Exact-head CI at 2026-09-16T13:33:01.8060875Z for 4f9cb520d93812c6653bdb17c79c6e2d9beb4267: 37 successful checks; 0 failed; 0 pending; 4 skipped review/security jobs (not counted as passes).

All 37 executed current-head checks completed successfully; four review/security jobs were skipped. This establishes automated review readiness, not live hardware validation, an independent human review, or approval to merge.

All 20 exact candidate commits were merged into synthetic integration d3c05b74ddfa from beta 3c186f3f12ba21dad7b7266ec5449393529abb00. That exact head passed 1,279 tests across 167 files, full ESLint (0 errors; 618 existing warnings), production build, scoped secret/private-key/large-file hooks and git diff --check on Windows Node 24.14.1. These are mocked browser/HTTP checks, not live GPU or deployment evidence.

Verified merge order: #3044 → #3046 → #3025 → #3038 → #3043 → #3050 → #3312 → #3313 → #3315 → #3316 → #3376 → #3041 → #3042 → #3051 → #3065 → #3062 → #3039 → #3040 → #3049 → #2780.

Merge guidance for this scope: The inventory hook message merges cleanly with the selected download-status UI changes.

The only textual conflicts inside the selected batch were #3316/#3040 (download hook plus tests) and #3046/#2780 (tests only). Use the linked integration commit as the reviewed resolution reference. Each PR remains independently based on beta; if merging them separately or squashing, reapply the relevant resolution and rerun affected suites. Outside-batch checks used git merge-tree only: #3846/#3848/#3841/#3843 merged textually, while #3803/#4356/#5276/#5125 conflicted. Textual compatibility alone does not establish runtime compatibility.

Additional clean-beta Linux checks: make lint, make smoke, and make simulate pass. make bats has five baseline environment failures (WSL classification, root permissions/preflight, and a 15 GB free-space boundary), in addition to the full-gate limitations described above. Installer/backend sources are unchanged by this batch. Rollback remains a revert and dashboard rebuild; no stored schema or backend lifecycle migration was introduced.

@Lightheartdevs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Thanks for this contribution. public-beta was promoted into main on 2026-09-24 and no longer receives changes, so we're closing pull requests that target it. This isn't a judgment on the change itself. If it's still needed, please rebase onto main and open a focused PR. See #7253 for details and the contribution policy.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants