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>
3.0 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-persistence-jpa-c12 | commit exception을 rollback으로 가정하지 않는다 | state-machines-and-ownership | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c12 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa |
commit exception을 rollback으로 가정하지 않는다
PolicyTransactionPort.inTransaction(...)은 단순 예외 기반 wrapper가 아니다. commit 호출 전에 phase를 COMMIT_REQUESTED로 올리고 Spring TransactionSynchronization sentinel로 실제 callback을 관찰한다.
본문
PolicyTransactionPort.inTransaction(...)은 단순 예외 기반 wrapper가 아니다. 결과는 최소 Committed, CommittedWithPostCommitFailure, Participating, DeterminateRollback, Indeterminate를 구분한다. 핵심은 commit exception = rollback으로 가정하지 않는 것이다.
SpringPolicyTransactionPort 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c12" alt="코드베이스에서 SpringPolicyTransactionPort 를 검색한 출력 5줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="SpringPolicyTransactionPort 코드베이스 검색 — 5줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
commit failure가 갈리는 세 갈래
commit 호출 전에 phase를 COMMIT_REQUESTED로 올리고, Spring TransactionSynchronization sentinel로 실제 callback을 관찰한다. commit에서 exception이 발생해도 이렇게 갈린다.
afterCommit()이 이미 확인됐으면CommittedWithPostCommitFailure- rollback callback/
UnexpectedRollbackException/replay-candidate가 확인되면DeterminateRollback - 그 외에는
Indeterminate
즉 연결 끊김 같은 애매한 exception을 "rollback이겠지"라고 간주하지 않는다.
replay가 일어나는 조건 전부
Indeterminate는 retry 대상이 아니다. replay 조건은 모두 만족해야 한다 — policy가 COMMAND_SERIALIZABLE_REPLAY_SAFE, 현재 attempt가 physical transaction owner, attempt < configured max, 현재 스레드가 인터럽트되지 않음, 결과가 DeterminateRollback, failure가 40001 serialization 또는 40P01 deadlock replay candidate.
따라서 commit ack를 못 받은 상태는 replay되지 않는다. 이 점은 뒤에서 다룰 JPA public API completion-evidence wiring gap의 중요한 mitigation이다 — 현재 canonical application path는 completion evidence infrastructure가 없어도 불확정 commit을 자동 재실행하지 않는다.