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>
2.6 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-messaging-c04 | 브로커가 받아들인 발행을 로거 실패가 실패로 만들지 못한다 | delivery-and-settlement-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-outbound-messaging-c04 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-outbound-messaging |
브로커가 받아들인 발행을 로거 실패가 실패로 만들지 못한다
두 발행 포트의 실패 정책이 정반대이고, 발행과 관측이 분리된 이유가 수정 이력으로 남아 있다.
본문
두 발행 포트의 실패 정책이 정반대다.
| 포트 | 정책 | 근거 |
|---|---|---|
MessagePublisher → OutboundMessagePublisher |
fail-open | "a broker outage must never turn a core use case into a 5xx (durable delivery is delegated to the outbox/retry path)" |
OutboxMessagePublishPort → OutboxMessagePublishAdapter |
fail-closed | 실패가 그대로 전파되어 relay가 FAILED/DEAD 전이를 몰 수 있게 한다 |
OutboundMessagePublisher 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-messaging-c04" alt="코드베이스에서 OutboundMessagePublisher 를 검색한 출력 13줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="OutboundMessagePublisher 코드베이스 검색 — 13줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
같은 try 블록을 쓰던 시절
OutboundMessagePublisher.publish에 이 저장소에서 반복해 본 종류의 수정 이력이 있다.
"The send and the observation are separate steps because they used to share a try block: a logger that threw after a successful send was caught by the same catch and reported as a publish failure. The broker had accepted the message; the only thing that failed was the record of it, and the two must not be confusable."
진단은 권위를 갖지 않는다
observeQuietly가 진단 예외를 흡수하며 "Diagnostics are non-authoritative. An appender that is out of disk must not change what the caller believes about the broker." 비활성 sentinel 둘은 조용한 no-op이 아니라 AdapterDisabledException을 던지고, 서로 다른 클래스로 분리된 이유가 bean 조회 모호성이다(§2).