Skip to content

chore: update byte units on frontend#4444

Open
MasterPtato wants to merge 1 commit into03-17-fix_runner_alloc_idx_logic_api_auth_for_actor_getfrom
03-17-chore_update_byte_units_on_frontend
Open

chore: update byte units on frontend#4444
MasterPtato wants to merge 1 commit into03-17-fix_runner_alloc_idx_logic_api_auth_for_actor_getfrom
03-17-chore_update_byte_units_on_frontend

Conversation

@MasterPtato
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Please include a summary of the changes and the related issue. Please also include relevant motivation and context.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes.

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes

@railway-app
Copy link

railway-app bot commented Mar 17, 2026

🚅 Deployed to the rivet-pr-4444 environment in rivet-frontend

Service Status Web Updated (UTC)
frontend-cloud 😴 Sleeping (View Logs) Web Mar 17, 2026 at 7:50 pm
frontend-inspector 😴 Sleeping (View Logs) Web Mar 17, 2026 at 7:48 pm
ladle ❌ Build Failed (View Logs) Web Mar 17, 2026 at 7:43 pm
website ❌ Build Failed (View Logs) Web Mar 17, 2026 at 7:41 pm
mcp-hub ✅ Success (View Logs) Web Mar 17, 2026 at 7:39 pm

Copy link
Contributor Author

MasterPtato commented Mar 17, 2026

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@claude
Copy link

claude bot commented Mar 17, 2026

PR Review: chore: update byte units on frontend\n\nThis is a correct and well-scoped fix. The underlying code was already using binary (base-2) math via bigBytes.GiB(), bigBytes.TiB(), bytes.KiB(), etc., but display labels and comments used SI decimal prefixes (KB, MB, GB, TB). This PR aligns the labels with the actual binary semantics.\n\n### Summary of changes\n\n| File | Change type |\n|------|-------------|\n| billing-page.tsx | Label-only: 4KB to 4KiB in descriptions |\n| plan-card.tsx | Label-only: GB/TB to GiB/TiB in plan feature lists |\n| usage-card.tsx | Functional: divisors corrected from 1000-based to 1024-based, plus unit labels updated |\n| metrics/constants.ts | Comment-only: 4KB to 4KiB |\n| billing.ts | Comment-only: GB/TB to GiB/TiB throughout |\n\n### Looks good\n\n- The only file with a meaningful logic change is usage-card.tsx. Previously it divided byte values by 1000-based multipliers (e.g., GB = 1000 * 1000 * 1000) while displaying a 'GB' label. Since stored values are binary, both the divisors and labels are now correctly fixed to IEC units.\n- All other files are comment/label corrections. Numeric values in billing.ts (e.g., bigBytes.GiB(100n)) were already correct and unchanged.\n- The inline comments on BILLING.included (e.g., // 100 GiB) now accurately describe what bigBytes.GiB(100n) produces.\n\n### Minor notes\n\nInconsistency in usage-card.tsx operations case: The bytes case now uses named constants (KiB, MiB, etc.), but the operations case still uses the raw literal 4096. Not a bug, but worth making consistent with the named-constant style used elsewhere in the same file.\n\nDocs check: CLAUDE.md asks to update website/src/content/docs/actors/limits.mdx when limits or unit terminology changes. The existing limits doc already uses GiB notation for KV storage, so no update is needed here, but worth a quick scan to confirm plan-tier descriptions are consistent if they appear anywhere in the docs.

@pkg-pr-new
Copy link

pkg-pr-new bot commented Mar 17, 2026

More templates

@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers@4444

@rivetkit/framework-base

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/framework-base@4444

@rivetkit/next-js

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/next-js@4444

@rivetkit/react

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/react@4444

rivetkit

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/rivetkit@4444

@rivetkit/sql-loader

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/sql-loader@4444

@rivetkit/sqlite-vfs

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/sqlite-vfs@4444

@rivetkit/traces

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/traces@4444

@rivetkit/workflow-engine

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/workflow-engine@4444

@rivetkit/virtual-websocket

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/virtual-websocket@4444

@rivetkit/engine-runner

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner@4444

@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol@4444

commit: 3b845cb

@MasterPtato MasterPtato force-pushed the 03-17-chore_update_byte_units_on_frontend branch from f1b6d0a to d4011f0 Compare March 17, 2026 20:38
@MasterPtato MasterPtato force-pushed the 03-17-fix_runner_alloc_idx_logic_api_auth_for_actor_get branch from 5b2bead to cfc4fad Compare March 17, 2026 20:38
@railway-app railway-app bot temporarily deployed to rivet-frontend / rivet-pr-4444 March 17, 2026 20:38 Destroyed
@MasterPtato MasterPtato force-pushed the 03-17-chore_update_byte_units_on_frontend branch from d4011f0 to 3b845cb Compare March 18, 2026 22:12
@MasterPtato MasterPtato force-pushed the 03-17-fix_runner_alloc_idx_logic_api_auth_for_actor_get branch from cfc4fad to 65280b5 Compare March 18, 2026 22:12
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.

1 participant