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>
82 lines
4.1 KiB
Plaintext
82 lines
4.1 KiB
Plaintext
# 두 번째 완료가 비교하는 것
|
|
261: if (row.state() == IdempotencyState.COMPLETED
|
|
262: && "COMPLETE".equals(row.lastTransitionKind())
|
|
263: && operationId.value().equals(row.lastTransitionOperationId())) {
|
|
264: return responseDigest.equals(row.responseDigest())
|
|
265: ? IdempotencyCompleteOutcome.ALREADY_COMPLETED_SAME_RESULT
|
|
266: : IdempotencyCompleteOutcome.RESPONSE_CONFLICT;
|
|
267: }
|
|
268: IdempotencyCompleteOutcome mismatch = classifyCompleteMismatch(row, owner);
|
|
|
|
# 첫 완료가 다이제스트에 넣는 것과 그 이유 주석
|
|
274: owner,
|
|
275: operationId.value(),
|
|
276: // The transition digest, not the response digest. Reusing the response digest here made
|
|
277: // two completions of different operations with identical payloads indistinguishable,
|
|
278: // and lost the replay window the completion also decided.
|
|
279: transitionDigest(
|
|
280: "COMPLETE",
|
|
281: operationId,
|
|
282: owner,
|
|
283: responseDigest,
|
|
284: Long.toString(replayTtl.toMillis())),
|
|
285: response.payload(),
|
|
|
|
# 공용 헬퍼와 그것이 읽는 열
|
|
557: private static ReplayVerdict replayVerdict(
|
|
558- IdempotencyRecordRow row,
|
|
559- String transitionKind,
|
|
560- OperationId operationId,
|
|
561- String expectedDigest) {
|
|
562- if (!transitionKind.equals(row.lastTransitionKind())
|
|
563- || !operationId.value().equals(row.lastTransitionOperationId())) {
|
|
564- return ReplayVerdict.NOT_A_REPLAY;
|
|
565- }
|
|
566- return expectedDigest.equals(row.lastTransitionResultDigest())
|
|
567- ? ReplayVerdict.SAME_ARGUMENTS
|
|
568- : ReplayVerdict.DIFFERENT_ARGUMENTS;
|
|
569- }
|
|
570-
|
|
27: String lastTransitionOperationId,
|
|
28: String lastTransitionKind,
|
|
29: String lastTransitionResultDigest,
|
|
58: ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS last_transition_result_digest char(64),
|
|
|
|
# 그 헬퍼를 쓰는 네 전이
|
|
182: switch (replayVerdict(row, "START", operationId, startDigest)) {
|
|
221: switch (replayVerdict(row, "RENEW", operationId, renewDigest)) {
|
|
319: switch (replayVerdict(row, transitionKind, operationId, failDigest)) {
|
|
366: switch (replayVerdict(row, "RELEASE", operationId, releaseDigest)) {
|
|
# complete 본문에서 그것을 부르는 줄: 0
|
|
|
|
# 값이 다르다는 것은 이미 단위 시험이 고정한다
|
|
39: void twoCompletionsWithDifferentReplayWindowsDiffer() {
|
|
40- assertThat(IdempotencyDigestPolicy.of("COMPLETE", "op-1", "owner-1", 1, 3, "digest-a", "60000"))
|
|
41- .isNotEqualTo(
|
|
42- IdempotencyDigestPolicy.of("COMPLETE", "op-1", "owner-1", 1, 3, "digest-a", "90000"));
|
|
43- }
|
|
|
|
# 갱신 경로의 주석
|
|
216: // The lease TTL is part of what a renewal decided, so it is part of the digest. Without it, a
|
|
217: // retry asking for a different lease was confirmed as the renewal already applied, and the
|
|
218: // caller went on believing it held the record for longer than the row says it does.
|
|
|
|
# 출하 통합 시험이 덮는 인자 재생
|
|
256: void aRetriedFailureWithTheSameArgumentsIsConfirmedRatherThanAppliedTwice() {
|
|
281: void aFailureRepeatedUnderOneOperationIdWithDifferentRetentionIsAConflict() {
|
|
315: void aRenewalRepeatedUnderOneOperationIdWithADifferentLeaseIsAConflict() {
|
|
# 그 파일에서 완료를 부르는 곳: 2
|
|
# ALREADY_COMPLETED_SAME_RESULT 를 단언하는 곳: 0
|
|
|
|
# 레디스 구현도 같은 자리에서 멈춘다
|
|
231: case "ALREADY" ->
|
|
232- // The same owner completing twice. Whether it is the same result decides whether this
|
|
233- // is an idempotent repeat or a contradiction the caller has to see.
|
|
234- reply.payload().equals(response.payload())
|
|
235- ? IdempotencyCompleteOutcome.ALREADY_COMPLETED_SAME_RESULT
|
|
236- : IdempotencyCompleteOutcome.RESPONSE_CONFLICT;
|
|
--
|
|
291: case "ALREADY" -> IdempotencyFailOutcome.ALREADY_MARKED_SAME_OPERATION;
|
|
113: return {'ALREADY', attempt, rev, owner, redis.call('HGET', KEYS[1], 'resp') or '', ''}
|
|
130: if ARGV[8] ~= '' then
|