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>
2.0 KiB
2.0 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-c18 | 문서가 지목하는 조정 레코드를 쓰는 코드가 없다 | transaction-and-consistency-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c18 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa |
문서가 지목하는 조정 레코드를 쓰는 코드가 없다
CompletionUnknownRecord와 CompletionUnknownRecorder는 current production에서 자신들의 정의 외 consumer/implementation이 없다. 그런데 문서는 훨씬 강한 계약을 선언한다.
본문
CompletionUnknownRecord와 CompletionUnknownRecorder는 current production에서 자신들의 정의 외 consumer/implementation이 없다.
CompletionUnknownRecord 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c18" alt="코드베이스에서 CompletionUnknownRecord 를 검색한 출력 10줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="CompletionUnknownRecord 코드베이스 검색 — 10줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
문서는 훨씬 강한 계약을 선언한다
support matrix는 이렇게 적는다.
Commit completion evidence = Stable
Automatic reconciliation unsupported.
The platform records; the domain resolves.
runbook은 신호로 jpa.transaction.completion.unknown 증가와 조정 채널의 CompletionUnknownRecord를 들고, 그 record의 transactionKey를 사용하라고 한다. 현재 이 record를 실제로 쓰는 production channel은 확인되지 않았다.