The standard cron process reconciles batches of 100 bank statement lines at a time. In multi-company environments with large historical datasets, this query frequently timed out, exceeding the 15-minute execution limit. Even when throttled to a batch size of 10 records, the query required approximately 18.8 seconds to execute.

The performance degradation was driven by the following factors:

1. Suboptimal Lateral Filtering: The statement line batch array filter was placed inside the `LATERAL` block's `WHERE` clause. This prevented the query planner from optimizing the drive path effectively across iterations.
2. Inefficient Join Sequence and Filtering: The original join order scanned `account_move_line` before resolving the company hierarchy constraint. As a result, millions of rows across all companies were retrieved from the index, forcing repeated primary key lookups on `res_company` before ultimately discarding over 99.9% of the records via the late `parent_path` hierarchy filter.

This commit addresses these issues by:

1. Moving the `st_line.id` filtering constraint out of the lateral subquery and into the outer main query block to guide the execution path properly.
2. Reordering the inner `LATERAL` subquery to resolve the company hierarchy (`res_company`) prior to joining `account_move_line`. This constraints the scan boundaries early in the pipeline.

Performance Benchmarks (10 record batch):
- Before Execution Time: ~18,818 ms
- Before Shared Hit Blocks: 8,535,272
- After Execution Time: ~130 ms
- After Shared Hit Blocks: 67,204 ms

Before Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/h4739gh3519eaa43
After Plan: https://explain.dalibo.com/plan/5ebc5g8deff272gc

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125250

Currently, when users group accrual reports by dates, aggregated computed fields are not calculated correctly. As a result, values such as the total amount may be displayed as zero even when the grouped records contain non-zero amounts.

## Steps to produce:
- Install Purchase and Accounting
- Create a product `Energy drink Sample` with cost 10$
- Create and Confirm a PO with the energy drink sample with vendor as `Administrator`
- Set `Received` as 1.
- Go to Accounting > Review > Bill to Receive
- Search Filter> Remove vendor grouping > Use Custom Group `Order Date`
- Expand the group

## Observed Behavior
Although the grouped lines contain an amount of 10 dollars, the aggregated total displayed in the sum remains zero.

The total should reflect the combined value of the grouped lines.

## Root Cause:
This issue occurs because opening the view triggers `_read_group_for_accrual`, which overrides the `_read_group` method on purchase order lines. The purpose of this override is to support grouping on computed fields that are not stored in the database such as `amount_to_invoice_at_date (Amount)`, `qty_received_at_date (Received)`.

When `_read_group_for_accrual` is executed, it delegates grouping for non-computed fields to the parent `_read_group` implementation, as shown at [1].

The parent method returns results in `res` similar to: 
```
[(datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0), 1.0, 10.0, 1)]
```
During iteration over res at [2], the code uses `group[0]` as the grouping key. In this example, group[0] is `datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0)`, which represents the granularity date
(e.g., the first day of the month when grouping by month).

However, `records_by_group` is keyed by the actual purchase order line order dates rather than the granularity dates returned by `_read_group`. For example:
```
{datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 12, 0, 0): purchase.order.line(1,)}
```

As a result, the lookup performed using the granularity date (`datetime.datetime(2026, 6, 1, 0, 0))` does not find a matching entry in `records_by_group`. Consequently, records falls back to an empty `purchase.order.line()` recordset.

Later, at [3], the aggregation logic computes totals using this empty recordset. Since the required fields are evaluated on an empty set of records, the aggregated values are computed as zero.

This ultimately causes the method to return a total value of zero
[1]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L9-L24 
[2]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L40-L42 
[3]-
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/eeea1377a7d36d11e140c44dee30a45228e7b4a6/account_accountant/models/analytic_mixin.py#L44-L47

## Solution:
The issue can be resolved by grouping records using the same date granularity specified in the groupby, rather than using the field values.

By aligning the grouping logic with the granularity returned by `_read_group` (for example, grouping by the first day of the month when using monthly grouping ), the keys in `records_by_group` match the values returned in `res`. As a result, the corresponding records are correctly retrieved during aggregation.

This ensures that the aggregation is performed on the appropriate purchase order lines instead of an empty recordset, allowing the computed totals to be calculated correctly.

[opw-6261225](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6261225)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#120369

Issue
-----
International deliveries for fractions of items (eg 500g of a product sold by kg) are rejected by Sendcloud.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Setup Sendcloud
	- Fedex international
- Create a product
	- weight: 1kg
	- valid hs code
- Create a contact (outside EU if the company is in EU)
- Deliver 0.5 of the product to the contact

> Error "... parcel not returned from Sendcloud"

Cause
-----
Sendcloud returns he folloing error:

> "The total weight for declared items exceeds the total weight set for the shipment."

This is because the `weight` set on the shipment

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L449-L464

corresponds to the weight of the package, whereas the weight set on the description of the product in `parcel_items` corresponds to the weight of one "full" unit of the product.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L327-L335

We cannot change the quantity in `parcel_items` to match the actual delivered one because the field should be an integer.

https://sendcloud.dev/api/v2/parcels/create-a-parcel-or-parcels#body-one-of-0-parcel-parcel-items-items-quantity

The price is also off, because it gets taken from the `move_line`, so it reflects the price of the actual quantity and not a "full" item.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/208a8a6a5adb8ec1f2710453c2ee3b54c55a9f1e/addons/stock_delivery/models/delivery_carrier.py#L235

Note that this issue is common to **all UoM types**.

Solution
-----
Since we cannot change the quantity, we can instead adapt the description and weight sent in `parcel_items`. For example, sending 300g of sugar, we would send
- description: "Sugar (0.3 kg)"
- weight: "0.300"

-----
Ticket:
opw-6346330

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124686

### Issue:

Attributes of DoctoRelacionado node in the XML display an incorrect value because the exchange rate difference entry distorts the calculation, even though the invoice was fully settled.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ntQny0o8bkkfYtY5ZNBK0Yq7Rq0I-yfz/view

### Fix:
Sorting partials by "not exchange_move_id" first broke the chronological order whenever the invoice/payment partial itself carried an exchange difference (e.g. a foreign currency payment settled at another rate). This made the residual-chain algorithm consume the credit note's "other_residual" on the wrong payment, so ImpSaldoAnt/ImpPagado/ ImpSaldoInsoluto in the payment CFDI's DoctoRelacionado stayed wrong even though the invoice was fully paid.

Populate the exchange move mapping in a separate first pass and sort the partials purely by date/id, so credit notes are always deducted from the correct payment.

task-id:[6363092](https://www.odoo.com/odoo/project/49/tasks/6363092)

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124882

### Steps to reproduce:
- In a database with Switzerland localization, install 'Accounting' and 'Payroll'
- Manually change the debit and credit accounts on the Swiss ELM salary rules (rule code 1000)
- Install 'POS'
- Check the accounts you configured on the salary rules
>The accounts are reset to their default values

### Cause of Issue:
POS depends on the module `stock_account`. When `stock_account` is installed, the `_configure_journals` method in its `__init__.py` creates a new `account.journal` for inventory valuation. To apply default values to this journal, the method retrieves data from the chart template.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/7d16ef88784e18e885b97dbded3231775f1349d2/addons/stock_account/__init__.py#L41

The `hr_payroll_account` module overrides `_post_load_data` and unconditionally calls `_load_payroll_accounts(template_code, company)`. https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/fcf06997a0eb999af86e4b6917311a86f04a390e/hr_payroll_account/models/account_chart_template.py#L16-L18

This triggers the reinstallation of the default payroll accounts, which overwrites and discards any manual configuration changes the user has made to their salary rules.

### Fix:
Ensure that default payroll accounts are only reset during a genuine chart of accounts loading process, and not during localized post-load operations triggered by other modules.

opw-6251112

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#121687

Steps to reproduce:
- Set the database language to Spanish (Latin America).
- Create a customer invoice, confirm it and send it to the SII.
- Print it using Print > Invoice PDF copy (Chile).
- Scroll to the CEDIBLE section at the bottom of the PDF.

Cause of the issue:
The CEDIBLE footer is merged into l10n_cl.report_invoice_document, which account.report_invoice (odoo/addons/l10n_cl/views/report_invoice.xml) renders with t-lang set to the invoice partner's lang, not the database/user language. The disclaimer text was hardcoded in English and relied on the regular translation to be shown in Spanish, so as
soon as the partner's lang field isn't Spanish, the translation lookup falls back to the untranslated English source, regardless of the database language.

Solution:
This disclaimer is boilerplate mandated by Chilean law: it must always be printed in Spanish, independently of the invoice partner's or current user's language. The same template already follows that rule a few lines above for the SII stamp block ("Timbre Electrónico SII..."), which is hardcoded in Spanish instead of relying on translation.

opw-6390207

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#124916

From the cart, it is possible to increase the amount ordered of a rental product that synchronizes shifts depending on a specific service

Steps to reproduce:
1. Install website_sale_renting_planning module
2. Go to Rental > Products and create a new product "test" with Sales enabled, Product Type "Service", Plan Services enabled as "Developer", in the Sales tab, enable Is Published and in the Rental prices tab, create a pricing for Daily period
3. In the General Information tab, click on the internal link to "Developer"
4. Enable Sync Shifts and Rental Orders
5. Go to the eCommerce website and search for product "test"
6. Add as much product "test" to the cart as possible (the quantity is limited)
7. Open the cart
8. You can increase the amount of the product regardless of its availability

Issue:
We don't check the renting availabilities to limit the maximum quantity of the product

Solution:
Check that the new quantity of the product is available in `_verify_updated_quantity` for the specified dates. We also need to check the availability of the product when we modify the rental dates

opw-6274035

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123056

[`_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed`] was called with self instead of slip. However, the method expects a payslip record from its caller, [`_compute_issues`].

This typo was introduced in:
odoo/enterprise@07201466e54f28c6d295d63b908e9a65e39f4862

```py
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py(1913)_compute_issues()
-> issues = generate_issue(slip, context)
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py(235)_issue_mx_warnings()
-> if not slip.company_id.l10n_mx_curp and self._l10n_mx_is_curp_needed():
  /home/odoo/src/enterprise/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py(322)_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed()
-> not self.company_id.partner_id.is_company
  /home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/fields.py(1726)__get__()
-> record.ensure_one()
> /home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/orm/models.py(5344)ensure_one()
-> raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
```
This causes module installation to fail with:
```py
  File "/home/odoo/src/odoo/saas-19.3/odoo/tools/convert.py", line 779, in convert_csv_import
    raise Exception(env._(
Exception: Module loading l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi failed: file l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/data/hr.employee.type.csv could not be processed:
Ocurrió un error desconocido durante la importación: <class 'ValueError'>: Expected singleton: res.partner(7, 9)
```

upg-4468049

[`_l10n_mx_is_curp_needed`]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/saas-19.3/l10n_mx_hr_payroll_account_edi/models/hr_payslip.py#L235
[`_compute_issues`]: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/saas-19.3/hr_payroll/models/hr_payslip.py#L1904-L1913

## Issue:
Exporting the general ledger as SIE4 set the duration of fiscal years to one year from the starting date of the fiscal year.

## Steps to reproduce:
- Create a fiscal year A of one month for year X-1 (December 1st to December31th year X-1)
- Create a fiscal year B of 1 year and 1 month (January 1st Year X to January 31th year X+1)
- Create Invoices in November year X-1, December year X-1, year X and in January year X+1 and confirm them
- Go to General Leder
- Set date to the fiscal year B
- Export as SIE4

### Current behavior:
- **for previous fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_to -1 year
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from -1 year
		- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- **for current fiscal year**
	- declared fiscal year (#RAR field) goes :
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_to
	- However data are computed:
		- from fiscal year X date_from
		- to fiscal year X date_from +1 year

### Expected behavior:
Declared fiscal year match the one that is use for computation.
- for previous fiscal year
	- from fiscal year X-1 date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_from -1 day
- for current year
	- from fiscal year X date_from
	- to fiscal year X date_to

Cause:
Current year length was wrong because it [relied on](https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/22b4100006ec24bf6e4b64042cbfdba360fcf470/l10n_se_sie4_export/models/account_general_ledger.py#L139-L140) the next_date_from which was wrong.


opw-6264766

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#125354

### Problem

`Mail: Fetchmail Service` cron aborts with `AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'upper'` in `l10n_cl_edi/models/fetchmail_server.py::_process_incoming_customer_claim` when an incoming customer claim DTE has no `<RUTRecep>`:

```python
dte.findtext('.//ns0:RUTRecep', ...).upper() or
dte.findtext('.//ns0:RutReceptor', ...).upper()
```

`findtext()` returns `None` when the tag is missing, so `.upper()` blows up before the `or` fallback can run. Once the cron hits such a message it re-crashes on every subsequent run and blocks the whole mailbox until the offending mail is deleted.

### Fix

Guard each `findtext(...)` with `or ''` so the `or` chain actually falls through. Empty `partner_vat` is already handled by the existing "Partner … has not been found" branch a few lines below.

### Traceback (Odoo 19)

```
File "/mnt/extra-addons/enterprise/l10n_cl_edi/models/fetchmail_server.py", line 285, in _process_incoming_customer_claim
    dte.findtext('.//ns0:RUTRecep', namespaces=XML_NAMESPACES).upper() or
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'upper'
```

### Ticket

No ticket open for this but opw-5257481 is related.

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#123387

Issue
-----
International deliveries for fractions of items (eg 500g of a product sold by kg) are rejected by Sendcloud.

Steps to reproduce
-----
- Setup Sendcloud
	- Fedex international
- Create a product
	- weight: 1kg
	- valid hs code
- Create a contact (outside EU if the company is in EU)
- Deliver 0.5 of the product to the contact

> Error "... parcel not returned from Sendcloud"

Cause
-----
Sendcloud returns he folloing error:

> "The total weight for declared items exceeds the total weight set for the shipment."

This is because the `weight` set on the shipment

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L449-L464

corresponds to the weight of the package, whereas the weight set on the description of the product in `parcel_items` corresponds to the weight of one "full" unit of the product.

https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/99a13453cac8a7a4677cef3df8896329c90c9e99/delivery_sendcloud/models/sendcloud_service.py#L327-L335

We cannot change the quantity in `parcel_items` to match the actual delivered one because the field should be an integer.

https://sendcloud.dev/api/v2/parcels/create-a-parcel-or-parcels#body-one-of-0-parcel-parcel-items-items-quantity

The price is also off, because it gets taken from the `move_line`, so it reflects the price of the actual quantity and not a "full" item.

https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/208a8a6a5adb8ec1f2710453c2ee3b54c55a9f1e/addons/stock_delivery/models/delivery_carrier.py#L235

Note that this issue is common to **all UoM types**.

Solution
-----
Since we cannot change the quantity, we can instead adapt the description and weight sent in `parcel_items`. For example, sending 300g of sugar, we would send
- description: "Sugar (0.3 kg)"
- weight: "0.300"

-----
Ticket:
opw-6346330

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#277440

### Issue:
The fix in commit `f0d164d3ab` introduced one cash rounding record per Indian company for new installations, but existing databases were not updated

Indian companies created before that fix still share the old `l10n_in.cash_rounding_in_half_up` record, and moves may be linked to a cash rounding belonging to another company

### Cause:
No migration script was included with the original fix

The script creates a dedicated cash rounding record for each Indian company that does not already have one, reassigns existing moves to the correct record, and migrates the XML ID of the original shared record to the new per-company format

### Steps to reproduce:
- Create a database with `l10n_in` installed before commit `f0d164d3ab`
- Create an invoice and set its Cash Rounding to `Half Up`
- Create a new Indian company (the `Half Up` record is now reassigned to the new company)
- Repeat the previous two steps as many times as desired
- Apply the fix (without the migration script) and upgrade `l10n_in`

Before the fix, invoices from other companies still reference the shared cash rounding record belonging to the last created company

- Apply the migration script and upgrade again

After the fix, each company has its own cash rounding record and existing invoices are reassigned correctly

opw-6318857

Currently, an error occurs when installing the hr_holidays_attendance module.

**Steps to Reproduce:**
 - Install the `hr_attendance` module without demo data.
 - Go to `Attendance` > `Configuration` > `Overtime Rulesets` and open the `Default Ruleset` record.
 - Delete its `linked overtime rules`.
 - Install the `hr_holidays_attendance` module.
 
 **Error:**
```py
Exception: Cannot update missing record 'hr_attendance.hr_attendance_overtime_employee_schedule_rule'

odoo.tools.convert.ParseError: while parsing /home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/data/hr_holidays_attendance_data.xml:7, somewhere inside <record id="hr_attendance.hr_attendance_overtime_employee_schedule_rule" model="hr.attendance.overtime.rule">
            <field name="compensable_as_leave" eval="True"/>
        </record>
```
This error occurs when the user deletes all overtime rules and then installs the hr_holidays_attendance 
module. During installation, the module attempts to update the deleted overtime rule records, 
which raises an error [1].

This commit uses forcecreate="0" to skip updating records if the corresponding overtime 
rules do not exist.

[1]- https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/da0a83761f38ee4a2940015b6c8f7190c310a4a0/addons/hr_holidays_attendance/data/hr_holidays_attendance_data.xml#L7-L12

sentry-7372074675

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

**Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:**

When rendering floating-point numbers with high decimal accuracy (e.g., UoM quantities set to 10 decimals), the UI can occasionally display a trailing parasitic digit (such as 53000.0000000002 instead of 53000.0000000000).

This commit resolves the issue by backporting the formatting logic from master. The `maxDecDigits` calculation is moved outside the conditionals so it unconditionally caps precision for all numbers. Furthermore, the global significant digit ceiling is reduced from 15 to 14.

This 14-digit ceiling reserves a 1-digit buffer, allowing the newly introduced `formatFixedDecimals` utility to safely run `roundDecimals` on the float. This mathematically sanitizes the trailing corrupted digit before it is ever converted to a string.

opw-6313540

**Current behavior before PR:**
- With Product UoM set to 10 Decimal Accuracy, floats such as 53000 are displayed with a corrupted digit (e.g. 53000.0000000002)

**Desired behavior after PR is merged:**
- With Product UoM set to 10 Decimal Accuracy, floats such as 53000 are displayed without corrupted digits (e.g. 53000.000000000)

This PR is essentially a backport of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/07da917f6e3319b4acde1029e77f69f1aba314b8 and https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/c4e7ba8d8fdfd7b0c442cf834f562ef8cedf019b for numbers.js

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276406
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#272940

**Steps to reproduce:**
- Install website_forum
- Create a new post on the forum with the admin
- Subscribe to the post notifications using the bell button
- Create a new portal user and give him 5 karma
    (to give him enough rights to answer and comment)
- Connect with the portal user and go to the post
- Create an answer
- Try to comment on your own answer
- AccessError is raised

**Issue:**
Since [1] we check comodel access (in this case `res.partner`) when adding records. Here during the `message_post` the `question_followers` are added manually as `partner_ids` before sending (the logic only relies on the original post subscribers, not on the added comment/reply).

```py
question_followers = self.env['mail.followers'].sudo().search([
    ('res_model', '=', self._name),
    ('res_id', '=', self.parent_id.id),
    ('partner_id', '!=', False),
]).filtered(lambda fol: comment_subtype in fol.subtype_ids).mapped('partner_id')
partner_ids += question_followers.ids
```

As the portal user has no `read` access to the subscribers the message creation fails with a traceback.

**Fix:**
Add `sudo` to the `message_post` call of `post_comment`.

(Also fix a minor display issue in the 'Karma Error' notification)

[1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/aae732957c3c3b3590f5686cfccc0ab264d0b5c9

opw-5318757

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#274751

Description of the issue this commit addresses:

When a member of the Invoicing group tries to create a payment trough the L10nPlAccountPaymentRegister wizard, upon clicking "Create Payment", an AccessError is thrown. Invoicing group members should be able to handle payments so this is an issue.

---

Steps to reproduce:

1. Make sure sale_management and l10n_pl_bank_verification are installed.
2. Create a new user with "Invoicing" Accounting group.
3. Create a new sales order with said user (any customer, any product)
4. Confirm the quotations and, from its form view, "Create Invoice".
5. Confirm the invoice and, from its form view, "Pay".
6. Upon clicking "Create Payment", an Access Error is thrown.

---

Desired behavior after this commit is merged:

This commit makes sure an Invoicing group member is able to create the payment withtout AccessErrors being thrown.

---

task-none
feedback from: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/267992

---

I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278688
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#270008

# How to reproduce
- Have two language in the db
- Create an e-Commerce category
- Have a different translation for each language for that category's name
- Copy the link to that category's name in one language (Should be something like /shop/category/name-x)
- Have two websites, each with a different default language
- Create a link to the shop category in each website.
> ! The link must be the exact same
> You can put it in the header menu for simplicity
- Open the website editor
- Do 2 or 3 times :
    - click on the category link and switch website

# The issue
A traceback is displayed

# Cause
This manipulation will make us enter an infinite redirect scenario described here :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/f8741728294a5147c7d2427d9997738096386262/addons/website/static/src/client_actions/website_preview/website_builder_action.js#L371-L384

The problem is that this commit introduced an assignation to `iframe.contentDocument.body` before the patch :
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/89994eb7a54ca606bab26b6d579d03e86c11ba60

But in our case, iframe.contentDocument is null, so it throws an error before the patch can be applied

opw-6322115

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276634

Issue caused because of https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/619d8ce9f31349ed06b11ead4988a4a1d9ca6bdd Steps to reproduce-
Create db with demo and install l10n_in
Create a new company for India (other than IN Company) Go to Settings -> Accounting/Invoice Tab -> Enable Ewaybill

traceback
```py
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5385, in ensure_one
    _id, = self._ids
    ^^^^
ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 1, got 0)

During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 273, in __call__
    response = serve_db(request)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/http/router.py", line 380, in serve_db
    registry = Registry(request.db)
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 105, in __new__
    return cls.new(db_name)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 217, in new
    cr.rollback()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/sql_db.py", line 568, in rollback
    with rollbacking:
  File "/home/odoo/.pyenv/versions/3.12.0/lib/python3.12/contextlib.py", line 144, in __exit__
    next(self.gen)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1004, in rollbacking
    self.restore_state()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 1067, in restore_state
    self.reset()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 912, in reset
    self._reset_registry_change()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 832, in _reset_registry_change
    registry._setup_models__(cr)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/tools/func.py", line 67, in locked
    return func(inst, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/registry.py", line 422, in _setup_models__
    env.invalidate_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 395, in invalidate_all
    self.flush_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 413, in flush_all
    self._recompute_all()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/environments.py", line 406, in _recompute_all
    self[field.model_name]._recompute_field(field)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 6462, in _recompute_field
    field.recompute(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2042, in recompute
    apply_except_missing(self.compute_value, recs)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2012, in apply_except_missing
    func(records)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 2066, in compute_value
    records._compute_field_value(self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/mail/models/mail_thread.py", line 498, in _compute_field_value
    return super()._compute_field_value(field)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 4387, in _compute_field_value
    determine(field.compute, self)
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/fields.py", line 82, in determine
    return needle(*args)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 228, in _compute_document_partners_details
    seller_buyer_details = ewaybill._get_seller_buyer_details()
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in_ewaybill/models/l10n_in_ewaybill.py", line 185, in _get_seller_buyer_details
    return move._get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/addons/l10n_in/models/account_invoice.py", line 629, in _get_l10n_in_seller_buyer_party
    self.ensure_one()
  File "/home/odoo/odoo18/community/odoo/orm/models.py", line 5388, in ensure_one
    raise ValueError("Expected singleton: %s" % self)
ValueError: Expected singleton: account.move()
```
In this commit, we resolve the above traceback

---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

When a bus process restarts, every client on every database it serves loses its websocket at the same instant and immediately schedules a reconnection. Each database that comes back triggers a registry recompute server-side, so a tight reconnection window makes all of those recomputes land together and pile up on the freshly started process.

The jitter added to each reconnection delay was only one second, far too narrow to break up that wave. Widen it to thirty seconds so the retries of the many clients fan out over a much wider window and the registry recomputes spread over time instead of colliding.

Raise the ceiling on the retry delay to two minutes to match that wider spread, and drop the exponential growth factor: with a thirty-second jitter accumulating on every attempt, the delay already climbs on its own, so scaling it further only pushed clients toward the ceiling sooner without spreading them any better.

Description of the issue/feature this PR addresses:

Current behavior before PR:

Desired behavior after PR is merged:




---
I confirm I have signed the CLA and read the PR guidelines at www.odoo.com/submit-pr

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#278599
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/odoo#276869