Real-time collaboration: Refetch entity when it is saved by a peer #72851
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Size Change: +223 B (+0.01%) Total Size: 2.19 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
maxschmeling
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2025
maxschmeling
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we be concerned about the fact that when someone hits save, every connected collaborator will make an API call to retrieve the entity? Problematic for the site workers when there are a large number of editors? Probably not enough collaborators to be a concern.
| if ( 'number' === typeof newValue && newValue > now ) { | ||
| // Another peer has saved the record. Refetch it so that we have | ||
| // a correct understanding of our own unsaved edits. | ||
| void handlers.refetchRecord().catch( () => {} ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this fails, there is something really problematic, right? Should we actually do something in the catch?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's very rare and likely an unrecoverable error like loss of permission or network error. (Both of which would result in eventual discconnection from the editing session.) Maybe there are more possible states? I'd elect to investigate and handle them in a separate enhancement.
ee8d992 to
4baafca
Compare
Contributor
Author
Good question. I think simultaneous requests in the double digits are a non-issue for platforms like ours and any host with caching proxies. Let's see if we can observe a performance problem. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Refetch the entity when it is saved by a peer.
Why?
When editing alone, an editor always has an accurate understanding of which edits are unsaved. In other words, they know when the entity is in a "dirty" state. When collaborating with others, however, this changes. If another peer saves the entity, I no longer know which of my edits are unsaved.
How?
SyncManagerthat allows it to refetch the entity.saveEntityRecordaction creator, callsyncManager.update()with a specialisSaveargument to signal that the current user just saved the entity.Testing Instructions
Testing Instructions for Keyboard
No UI changes in this PR.