Files
document-haness/docs/clean-architecture-backend-template/tech-log-studio/transaction-and-consistency-models/concept/concept-adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22.md
T
DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5 b2963105a8 docs(keycloak-session-store): import the session-storage lab as a new project
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>
2026-09-04 22:51:59 +09:00

41 lines
1.9 KiB
Markdown

---
kind: CONCEPT
slug: adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22
title: adapter 오류 경계 쪽 번역기는 다른 출력을 낸다
topic: transaction-and-consistency-models
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
status: 게시 전
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
rootTreeNode: concept:adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
assets:
- key: adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22.svg
evidence:
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22.txt
source:
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/05-adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa.md#L1384 이다.
module: adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa
---
# adapter 오류 경계 쪽 번역기는 다른 출력을 낸다
`failure.PersistenceExceptionTranslator`의 consumer는 adapter/application error boundary 쪽이다. retry algebra 쪽 번역기와 출력 계약이 다르다.
## 본문
<!-- body:start -->
`failure.PersistenceExceptionTranslator`의 consumer는 adapter/application error boundary 쪽이다. 따라서 retry algebra 쪽 번역기와 동일 이름 영역을 다루지만 current evidence로는 competing duplicate implementation이 아니다.
## 분석 원문의 소비자 서술
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c22" alt="분석 문서 analysis/05-adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa.md 에서 이 기록의 근거 절을 그대로 잘라낸 15줄. 코드베이스를 측정한 것이 아니라 원본 판정이 무엇을 적었는지를 보여 준다." caption="analysis/05-adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa.md 발췌 — 15줄" zoom="true"
:::
## 두 번역기가 나누는 출력 계약
**transaction retry algebra와 platform operational error mapping이라는 서로 다른 output contract**를 가진다. PostgreSQL vendor translator와 exact SQLSTATE catalog correctness는 vendor sub-scope에서 계속 검증한다.
<!-- body:end -->