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>
54 lines
3.9 KiB
Plaintext
54 lines
3.9 KiB
Plaintext
# 주제: FaultController 의 5개 메서드 중 2개가 호출부 0건이며,
|
|
# 그 2개를 포함한 구현 내부클래스가 3개 모듈에 바이트 단위로 동일하게 복제되어 있다
|
|
# revision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
|
|
|
|
# command: for m in dropPublishConfirmation dropSettlementConfirmation failDeadLetterPublish rejectPublish reset brokerName; do git grep -n "\.$m()" -- src; done
|
|
# exit: 0
|
|
dropPublishConfirmation() : 호출 1 건
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/main/java/dev/caskeleton/messaging/testkit/MessagingAdapterContract.java:40
|
|
dropSettlementConfirmation() : 호출 1 건
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/main/java/dev/caskeleton/messaging/testkit/MessagingAdapterContract.java:53
|
|
failDeadLetterPublish() : 호출 1 건
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/main/java/dev/caskeleton/messaging/testkit/MessagingAdapterContract.java:104
|
|
rejectPublish() : 호출 0 건 <-- 계약 스위트 어디에서도 주입되지 않음
|
|
reset() : 호출 0 건 (messaging 범위) <-- git grep "\.reset()" 은 17건이나 전부 다른 클래스
|
|
(web BoundedHttpServletResponse, websocket FragmentAssembler 등).
|
|
FaultController.reset 을 부르는 곳은 없다.
|
|
brokerName() : 호출 3 건 (그중 1건만 하니스: KafkaContractHarness.java:102,
|
|
나머지 2건은 MessagingRuntime.brokerName 으로 다른 타입)
|
|
|
|
# command: git grep -n "rejectPublish" -- src
|
|
# exit: 0
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/main/java/.../FaultController.java:22: void rejectPublish(); <-- 인터페이스 선언
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-kafka/src/test/java/.../KafkaContractHarness.java:318,336,337,345,361,362
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-rabbit/src/test/java/.../RabbitContractHarness.java:252,270,271,279,295,296
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/test/java/.../InMemoryMessagingHarness.java:208,226,227,235,251,252
|
|
# => 선언 1 + 구현 3 (각 6줄) + 호출 0.
|
|
|
|
# command: git grep -n "consumeRejectPublish()" -- src (구현 3곳 모두 publish() 경로에 배선되어 있음)
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-kafka/src/test/java/.../KafkaContractHarness.java:119: if (faults.consumeRejectPublish()) {
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-rabbit/src/test/java/.../RabbitContractHarness.java:85: if (faults.consumeRejectPublish()) {
|
|
src/messaging/messaging-testkit/src/test/java/.../InMemoryMessagingHarness.java:66: if (faults.consumeRejectPublish()) {
|
|
# => 코드 경로는 완성되어 있고, 그 경로를 켜는 스위치를 아무도 누르지 않는다.
|
|
|
|
# command: awk "/private static final class Faults implements FaultController/,/^ }$/" <각 하니스> | sha256sum
|
|
# exit: 0
|
|
KafkaContractHarness.java : 57 줄 sha256[0:16]=3028b4591144fe86
|
|
RabbitContractHarness.java : 57 줄 sha256[0:16]=3028b4591144fe86
|
|
InMemoryMessagingHarness.java: 57 줄 sha256[0:16]=3028b4591144fe86
|
|
diff kafka vs rabbit -> IDENTICAL
|
|
diff kafka vs inmemory -> IDENTICAL
|
|
# => Faults 내부클래스 57줄이 3개 모듈에 완전히 동일하게 3중복. 총 171줄.
|
|
|
|
# 부수 관찰 (미검증 아님, 코드 직접 확인):
|
|
# InMemoryMessagingHarness.java:66-68 에서 rejectPublish 경로는
|
|
# rejected("BROKER_REJECTED", "the broker refused the publish")
|
|
# 를 돌려주고, rejected(...) 는 PublishEvidence.notTransmitted() 를 쓴다
|
|
# (InMemoryMessagingHarness.java:184-193).
|
|
# PublishEvidence.notTransmitted() 는 TransmissionEvidence.NOT_TRANSMITTED 이며
|
|
# 그 javadoc 은 "Nothing was written to the broker connection." 이다
|
|
# (messaging-core-api/.../TransmissionEvidence.java:6-7).
|
|
# FaultController.rejectPublish 의 javadoc 은 "refused outright by *the broker*" 다
|
|
# (FaultController.java:21). 브로커가 거절했다면 바이트는 나갔으므로
|
|
# NOT_TRANSMITTED 는 사실과 다르다. 이 경로가 한 번도 실행되지 않아 드러나지 않았다.
|