Bound WebRTC video uploads and clean up owned files

[digaobarbosa]

Description

WebRTC file uploads can retain arbitrary data and orphan temporary files; apply the existing video input budget to one validated upload per session and clean up failed or closed uploads.

Type of change

• Bug fix

How has this change been tested?

• 20 focused automated tests passed, including channel callbacks, concurrent completion and cleanup failures.
• Black, isort and diff checks passed.
• Staging validation pending.

Any specific deployment considerations

• Inference HTTP/WebRTC workers, including the Modal worker image.
• Reuses MAX_VIDEO_DOWNLOAD_SIZE_MB (512 MiB default; negative values opt out) and the existing 48 KiB WebRTC chunk size. The default permits at most 10,923 chunks; custom chunk sizes must fit this envelope.
• Upload progress/watchdog policy is handled separately.

[github-actions]

👋 Thanks for the pull request! Here is how automated Claude review works here, so you spend credits (and reviewer time) wisely.

🚧 Right now this is a draft, so automated Claude review is paused — nothing is being spent yet. Mark it Ready for review to trigger it.

Warning

💸 The Claude reviewer bills in credits, not vibes

Automated review spins up a real agent that reads real code and spends real credits on every pass. It is glad to help — but it is not a rubber duck, a linter you poke in a loop, or a substitute for reading the contributing guide. Treat it like an expensive senior reviewer whose time you booked, and show up prepared.

Draft when unsure, Ready when you mean it:

• 🌱 Not sure the PR is in good shape yet? Keep it (or set it back) as a draft — drafts pause review, so you can push and iterate without burning credits on a moving target.
• 💪 Feel strong about the contents? Mark it Ready for review and the reviewer will take a look.

However you get there, arrive prepared:

• 🧱 Bring a SOLID, thorough PR. Point your local agent at our skills/ to tune it to our guidelines first — or, if you are one of those fabled carbon-based contributors, read them yourself. A half-baked diff costs exactly the same to review as a finished one.
• ✅ Resolve every comment before you re-request review. Re-requesting with threads still open means paying twice for the same conversation.
• 🔁 Do not use CI review as an inner loop for a local agent. The reviewer is not a step-by-step debugger — do the unfolding locally and arrive with the answer, not the search.
• 🙋 If something looks off, ask a human. One question to a maintainer is cheaper and faster than three rounds of agent re-review chasing a misread.

Reviews are not free. A draft costs nothing to review; a Ready PR is a promise that it is worth reviewing.

• Prefer to skip automated review entirely? Add the skip-claude-review label.

[PawelPeczek-Roboflow]

I believe we have potential mismatch between client and server priors, which if adjusted though publicly exposed knobs would cause errors.

Client sdk could set WEBRTC_VIDEO_UPLOAD_CHUNK_SIZE not matching server-side CHUNK_SIZE. When this is done, server makes wrong assumptions regrading expected number of chunks.
As a result:

• Server log: "Video upload rejected" with a traceback ending in "Invalid video upload chunk count". Misleading. The count is correct for the chunk size the client chose.
• Client: "Upload channel closed during upload". No size, no reason.

[digaobarbosa]

Thanks Pawel, still in draft, I need to do more testing and try to simplify this.