DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
b2963105a8
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2.4 KiB
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCEPT | adapter-outbound-cache-redis-c06 | 모호한 실행을 재시도 가능으로 표시할 수 없다 | delivery-and-settlement-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-outbound-cache-redis-c06 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-outbound-cache-redis |
모호한 실행을 재시도 가능으로 표시할 수 없다
RedisFailureMetadata의 불변식 하나가 이 SDK의 재시도 규칙 전체다 — 모호한 실행은 재시도 가능일 수 없다.
본문
RedisFailureMetadata는 "Low-cardinality, payload-free description"이고, 불변식 하나가 이 SDK의 재시도 규칙 전체다.
if (retryable && ambiguousExecution) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("an ambiguous execution must never be marked retryable");
}
RedisFailureMetadata 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-cache-redis-c06" alt="코드베이스에서 RedisFailureMetadata 를 검색한 출력 30줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="RedisFailureMetadata 코드베이스 검색 — 30줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
두 팩토리가 그 규칙을 실제 상황에 적용한다
notSent(...)는 retryable = readOperation으로 유도한다 — 서버에 닿지 않은 읽기는 재시도해도 안전하다. storedDataCorruption(...)은 일부러 notSent가 아니고, javadoc이 그 이유를 적는다 — 같은 바이트를 다시 디코딩하면 같은 실패가 나오므로 값이 틀린 것이지 시도가 틀린 것이 아니다. 그 팩토리는 실제로 쓰인다 — JsonEnvelopeFraming:202, VersionedJsonCodec:103 두 곳이 디코딩 실패에서 호출한다.
메시지가 담지 않는 것
예외 계층은 12종이고 전부 RedisOperationException을 상속한다. 메시지는 reason + command= 계열 + mode= + ambiguous=만 조립하고, javadoc이 경계를 적는다 — "keys, fields, members, values, arguments, and authentication material never appear."