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>
3.3 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 | application-core-c03 | 예외가 발생했다는 것을 rollback으로 단순화하지 않는다 | transaction-and-consistency-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:application-core-c03 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
application-core |
예외가 발생했다는 것을 rollback으로 단순화하지 않는다
TransactionPolicyId가 Spring propagation 숫자 대신 application semantic ID를 노출하고, TransactionResult가 commit 결과를 다섯 상태로 분리한다.
관계
- legacy storage/notification compatibility surface의 제거 조건 추적 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
본문
TransactionPort는 inWrite, inRootWrite, inRead, inNew 네 개의 framework-neutral boundary를 노출한다. PolicyTransactionPort는 기존 surface를 깨지 않고 TransactionRequest -> TransactionResult 정책 기반 API를 추가한다.
노출하는 어휘와 감추는 어휘
:::evidence key="application-core-c03-diagram" alt="application-core 경계 안에 정책 식별자와 결과 대수가 들어 있고 Spring 전파 숫자가 경계 밖 빗금 상자로 놓인 구조" caption="노출하는 어휘와 감추는 어휘" zoom="false" :::
TransactionPolicyId는 Spring propagation 숫자가 아니라 COMMAND_DEFAULT, COMMAND_SERIALIZABLE_REPLAY_SAFE, QUERY_PRIMARY, QUERY_REPLICA_ELIGIBLE, OUTBOX_APPEND, INBOX_AND_HANDLER, MAINTENANCE_NEW처럼 application semantic ID를 노출한다. TransactionRequest constructor는 read policy의 consistency allowlist, non-read의 readConsistency 금지, operationId-required policy의 stable id 존재를 fail-fast한다.
이 기록이 다루는 파일 범위
:::evidence key="application-core-c03" alt="코드베이스에서 파일 목록을 만든 출력 25줄. 이 기록이 다루는 범위가 그 목록이다." caption="코드베이스 파일 목록 — 25줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
commit 결과 다섯 상태
Committed: physical commit을 확인한 결과.Participating: outer transaction에 참여했지만 아직 commit을 주장할 수 없는 결과.DeterminateRollback: rollback이 확정된 실패.Indeterminate: commit 여부를 확정할 수 없는 결과.CommittedWithPostCommitFailure: commit은 됐지만 이후 operational cleanup이 실패한 결과.
Indeterminate를 정식 상태로 두는 이유
이 algebra의 핵심은 "exception이 발생했다 = rollback"으로 단순화하지 않는 것이다. Indeterminate는 last observed transaction phase와 optional reconciliation reference를 보존하며, CompletionResolution은 STILL_UNKNOWN을 정식 상태로 둔다. 불확실한 commit을 임의로 NOT_COMMITTED로 가정해 use case를 재실행하는 것을 피한다.