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>
41 lines
1.8 KiB
Plaintext
41 lines
1.8 KiB
Plaintext
# 사유 필드와 그 문서
|
|
/**
|
|
* The outcome of classifying one failed attempt (design §9.4).
|
|
*
|
|
* <p>The {@code reason} is a bounded diagnostic string chosen by the policy, never a provider
|
|
* message, so it is safe to log and to use as a low-cardinality metric tag.
|
|
*/
|
|
public record RetryDecision(RetryDisposition disposition, Duration delay, String reason) {
|
|
# 컴팩트 생성자가 검사하는 것 전부
|
|
public RetryDecision {
|
|
Objects.requireNonNull(disposition, "disposition");
|
|
Objects.requireNonNull(delay, "delay");
|
|
Objects.requireNonNull(reason, "reason");
|
|
if (delay.isNegative()) {
|
|
throw new IllegalArgumentException("retry delay must not be negative");
|
|
}
|
|
if (disposition != RetryDisposition.RETRY_FULL_TRANSACTION && !delay.isZero()) {
|
|
throw new IllegalArgumentException("only a full transaction retry may carry a delay");
|
|
}
|
|
if (reason.isBlank()) {
|
|
throw new IllegalArgumentException("retry decision requires a reason");
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
# 공개 팩토리 넷. 사유를 인자로 받는 것은 셋이다.
|
|
30: public static RetryDecision retry(Duration delay) {
|
|
36: public static RetryDecision retry(Duration delay, String reason) {
|
|
41: public static RetryDecision reconcile(String reason) {
|
|
46: public static RetryDecision fail(String reason) {
|
|
# 이 파일에서 길이·어휘·형식을 검사하는 코드: 0
|
|
|
|
# 이 타입을 소비하는 main 파일 전부
|
|
FullTransactionRetryCoordinator.java
|
|
DefaultJpaRetryPolicy.java
|
|
JpaRetryObservation.java
|
|
# 그중 reason() 을 읽는 줄: 0
|
|
|
|
# 그런데 결정 객체 자체는 메트릭을 내는 곳까지 간다
|
|
106: listener.onAttemptFailed(operation, attempt, failure, decision);
|
|
41: LowCardinality.requireRegistered(persistenceUnit);
|
|
58: .tag("retry.disposition", decision.disposition().name())
|