fix(core): date time input fixes #11233

pedrobonamin · 2025-11-24T10:36:46Z

Description

This PR fixes 4 issues found in the date time input.

SAPP-3184 - inconsistent time in time input

If a date is selected on any day in the future, the timestamp shows 00:000Z for the seconds. It looks like this:

"datetime": "2025-10-22T14:10:00.000Z"
If a later time is selected on the current day, it appears like this:

"datetime": "2025-10-09T09:20:52.718Z"
I found this to be happening because of how we set the initial values for the time input, we use new Date() which will default to use the current seconds and miliseconds, once set, there is no way to change if it is not exposed as part of the date time format. This change, prevents this from happening and doesn't set seconds and miliseconds in the time input for the initial value

`timeStep` was not respected

fixes sanity-io/ui#2137
fixes #11003

Pass the timeStep property to the time input, we are multiplying it by 60 because our docs indicates that this time is set in minutes, not seconds like the one in the time input. To support existing behaviors we are multiplying that value by 60.
This doesn't update the UI that is rendered when the user clicks in the input, but it is respected natively by the browsers when using arrow up and down, and it also validates the value and sets the closes value to the time selected, so, if you have a timeStep of 10 minutes and select 11:14 it will set the time to 11:10 .

Example with 15 minutes time step

Using arrows up and down works as expected.
Selecting a minute which is not a valid step, won't update the input value.

Screen.Recording.2025-11-24.at.15.08.07.mov

Delayed on change

We were using for the time input a lazy text input, this has the downside that the change is triggered only on blur of the input, which could cause users to lose the values they have updated if they close the calendar before triggering an onBlur action, which is not ideal and produces an unexpected behavior
This PR updates this input to use a normal text input, I think there is no real need to use here a lazy because the changes will not happen frequently, given the user needs to select the time in the input.

Now, each change in the hours - minute selector is propagated immediately

Screen.Recording.2025-11-24.at.15.11.10.mov

Invalid date time value was propagated from the time selector

When selecting a time which was invalid and blurring the input, that value was propagated up and inside releases it made the releases tool crash, this is now fixed by checking for the existence of the value before propagating it up.

Issue example:

Screen.Recording.2025-11-24.at.15.14.15.mov

What to review

Is the change from LazyTextInput to TextInput bad?
Is there any gotcha we can consider for the miliseconds update? Should we also make the same change in the set to current time button?

Testing

Visit the studio in https://test-studio-eoojv5grb.sanity.dev/test/structure/input-standard;datetimeTest;9bc2cd38-496b-4014-befc-c0c9bebbce9b and try the changes in the time inputs components.

Notes for release

Fixes inconsistent second and milliseconds in the time input initial value.
Restore support for time step in the time input
Fixes an issue in where in some cases the releases tool could crash when doing changes in the time input

vercel · 2025-11-24T10:36:53Z

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
page-building-studio	Ready	Preview	Comment	Nov 24, 2025 2:54pm
test-studio	Ready	Preview	Comment	Nov 24, 2025 2:54pm

3 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Preview	Updated (UTC)
e2e-studio	Ignored		Nov 24, 2025 2:54pm
studio-workshop	Ignored	Preview	Nov 24, 2025 2:54pm
test-next-studio	Ignored		Nov 24, 2025 2:54pm

github-actions · 2025-11-24T10:37:14Z

🧪 E2E Preview environment

🔑 Environment Variables for Local Testing

This is the preview URL for the E2E tests: https://e2e-studio-2zvnf95vz.sanity.dev

To run the E2E tests locally, you can use the following environment variables, then run pnpm test:e2e --ui to open the Playwright test runner.

💬 Remember to build the project first with pnpm build:e2e.

  SANITY_E2E_PROJECT_ID=ittbm412
  SANITY_E2E_BASE_URL=https://e2e-studio-2zvnf95vz.sanity.dev
  SANITY_E2E_DATASET="update depending the project you want to test (pr-11233-chromium-19638388011 || pr-11233-firefox-19638388011 )"
  SANITY_E2E_DATASET_CHROMIUM=pr-11233-chromium-19638388011
  SANITY_E2E_DATASET_FIREFOX=pr-11233-firefox-19638388011

github-actions · 2025-11-24T10:37:16Z

📊 Playwright Test Report

Download Full E2E Report

This report contains test results, including videos of failing tests.

github-actions · 2025-11-24T10:42:40Z

⚡️ Editor Performance Report

Updated Mon, 24 Nov 2025 15:06:15 GMT

Benchmark	reference ^{latency of sanity@latest}	experiment ^{latency of this branch}	Δ (%) ^{latency difference}
article (title)	24.7 efps (41ms)	26.3 efps (38ms)	-3ms (-6.2%)	✅
article (body)	38.8 efps (26ms)	37.5 efps (27ms)	+1ms (+3.5%)	✅
article (string inside object)	29.0 efps (35ms)	27.8 efps (36ms)	+2ms (+4.3%)	✅
article (string inside array)	26.0 efps (39ms)	25.6 efps (39ms)	+1ms (+1.3%)	✅
recipe (name)	58.8 efps (17ms)	55.6 efps (18ms)	+1ms (+5.9%)	✅
recipe (description)	71.4 efps (14ms)	71.4 efps (14ms)	+0ms (-/-%)	✅
recipe (instructions)	99.9+ efps (5ms)	99.9+ efps (5ms)	+0ms (-/-%)	✅
singleString (stringField)	76.9 efps (13ms)	66.7 efps (15ms)	+2ms (-/-%)	✅
synthetic (title)	17.4 efps (58ms)	17.1 efps (59ms)	+1ms (+1.7%)	✅
synthetic (string inside object)	17.5 efps (57ms)	18.5 efps (54ms)	-3ms (-5.3%)	✅

efps — editor "frames per second". The number of updates assumed to be possible within a second.

Derived from input latency. efps = 1000 / input_latency

Detailed information

🏠 Reference result

The performance result of sanity@latest

Benchmark	latency	p75	p90	p99	blocking time	test duration
article (title)	41ms	54ms	81ms	119ms	51ms	10.4s
article (body)	26ms	30ms	78ms	132ms	144ms	6.1s
article (string inside object)	35ms	38ms	41ms	83ms	0ms	5.7s
article (string inside array)	39ms	46ms	61ms	90ms	11ms	6.1s
recipe (name)	17ms	22ms	26ms	41ms	0ms	6.9s
recipe (description)	14ms	17ms	20ms	31ms	0ms	4.0s
recipe (instructions)	5ms	9ms	11ms	23ms	0ms	3.0s
singleString (stringField)	13ms	15ms	18ms	18ms	0ms	5.9s
synthetic (title)	58ms	60ms	69ms	138ms	278ms	15.0s
synthetic (string inside object)	57ms	59ms	67ms	267ms	556ms	7.8s

🧪 Experiment result

The performance result of this branch

Benchmark	latency	p75	p90	p99	blocking time	test duration
article (title)	38ms	42ms	80ms	125ms	46ms	10.4s
article (body)	27ms	30ms	79ms	112ms	70ms	5.9s
article (string inside object)	36ms	40ms	59ms	85ms	7ms	5.8s
article (string inside array)	39ms	42ms	57ms	99ms	0ms	6.1s
recipe (name)	18ms	22ms	26ms	40ms	0ms	6.9s
recipe (description)	14ms	17ms	21ms	41ms	0ms	4.1s
recipe (instructions)	5ms	9ms	10ms	12ms	0ms	2.9s
singleString (stringField)	15ms	17ms	21ms	34ms	0ms	6.1s
synthetic (title)	59ms	62ms	83ms	180ms	257ms	15.1s
synthetic (string inside object)	54ms	56ms	78ms	122ms	113ms	7.8s

📚 Glossary

column definitions

benchmark — the name of the test, e.g. "article", followed by the label of the field being measured, e.g. "(title)".

latency — the time between when a key was pressed and when it was rendered. derived from a set of samples. the median (p50) is shown to show the most common latency.

p75 — the 75th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 75% of the sampled inputs in this benchmark were processed faster than this value. this provides insight into the upper range of typical performance.

p90 — the 90th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 90% of the sampled inputs were faster than this. this metric helps identify slower interactions that occurred less frequently during the benchmark.

p99 — the 99th percentile of the input latency in the test run. only 1% of sampled inputs were slower than this. this represents the worst-case scenarios encountered during the benchmark, useful for identifying potential performance outliers.

blocking time — the total time during which the main thread was blocked, preventing user input and UI updates. this metric helps identify performance bottlenecks that may cause the interface to feel unresponsive.

test duration — how long the test run took to complete.

github-actions · 2025-11-24T14:07:33Z

Coverage Report

Status	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🔵	Lines	44.66%	63617 / 142441
🔵	Statements	44.66%	63617 / 142441
🔵	Functions	48.25%	3396 / 7038
🔵	Branches	79.32%	12908 / 16272

File Coverage

File	Stmts	Branches	Functions	Lines	Uncovered Lines
Changed Files
packages/sanity/src/core/components/inputs/DateInputs/DatePicker.tsx	91.17%	69.23%	100%	91.17%	41-44
packages/sanity/src/core/components/inputs/DateInputs/TimeInput.tsx	100%	100%	100%	100%
packages/sanity/src/core/components/inputs/DateInputs/calendar/Calendar.tsx	87.42%	87.12%	57.14%	87.42%	162, 208-230, 247, 350-354, 414-428, 440-453

Generated in workflow #46096 for commit 76a6997 by the Vitest Coverage Report Action

juice49

This is so good. Especially finally solving the issue that prevents the selected value being persisted on blur. Thanks, Pedro!

I don't predict any issues in switching away from the lazy input myself.

pedrobonamin added 3 commits November 24, 2025 11:13

fix(core): trigger time input updates on every change

294f194

fix(core): don't use seconds and miliseconds for datetime initial values

c48525f

fix(core): use timeStep in time input

17cf89a

pedrobonamin requested a review from a team as a code owner November 24, 2025 10:36

pedrobonamin requested review from juice49 and removed request for a team November 24, 2025 10:36

vercel bot deployed to Preview – test-studio November 24, 2025 14:02 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – page-building-studio November 24, 2025 14:03 View deployment

fix(core): not propagate undefined time value from the timeInput

179ca67

pedrobonamin force-pushed the sapp-3184 branch from f39ad54 to 179ca67 Compare November 24, 2025 14:07

vercel bot deployed to Preview – test-studio November 24, 2025 14:13 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – page-building-studio November 24, 2025 14:14 View deployment

chore(core): simplify initial selectedDate value for Calendar

76a6997

vercel bot deployed to Preview – test-studio November 24, 2025 14:53 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – page-building-studio November 24, 2025 14:54 View deployment

juice49 approved these changes Nov 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

pedrobonamin merged commit 84418b4 into main Nov 26, 2025
72 of 76 checks passed

pedrobonamin deleted the sapp-3184 branch November 26, 2025 08:27

squiggler bot mentioned this pull request Nov 26, 2025

chore(release): publish v4.20.0 #11266

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

fix(core): date time input fixes #11233

fix(core): date time input fixes #11233

Uh oh!

pedrobonamin commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

🏠 Reference result

🧪 Experiment result

📚 Glossary

column definitions

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

juice49 left a comment •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

fix(core): date time input fixes #11233

fix(core): date time input fixes #11233

Uh oh!

Conversation

pedrobonamin commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

SAPP-3184 - inconsistent time in time input

timeStep was not respected

Delayed on change

Invalid date time value was propagated from the time selector

What to review

Testing

Notes for release

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🧪 E2E Preview environment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

📊 Playwright Test Report

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

⚡️ Editor Performance Report

🏠 Reference result

🧪 Experiment result

📚 Glossary

column definitions

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Coverage Report

Uh oh!

juice49 left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

pedrobonamin commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

`timeStep` was not respected

vercel bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

juice49 left a comment •

edited

Loading