Files
keycloak-pattern/docs/evidence/a7a-volatile-cause/README.md
T
DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5 b9f4ef7bc2 docs(a7a): the volatile refresh failure is a client-scope lookup, not REVOKED_TOKEN
A-7 left the cause as a hypothesis and said to confirm it with the statement
logging A-3 used. Doing that shows the hypothesis was wrong.

Login issues no SQL at all in volatile mode. Refresh issues exactly one
statement, and it is not the one A-7 guessed:

  select cscme1_0.SCOPE_ID from CLIENT_SCOPE_CLIENT cscme1_0
   where cscme1_0.CLIENT_ID=$1 and cscme1_0.DEFAULT_SCOPE=$2
   parameters: $1 = '131a9912-...', $2 = 'f'

REVOKED_TOKEN never appears. DEFAULT_SCOPE='f' means this is the optional
client scope list, which refresh needs because it recomputes which scopes go
into the new access token.

The larger finding is that A-7's table was conditional and did not say so.
The single statement is issued once and then cached, so the same
configuration produces three different outcomes depending only on cache
warmth — all three reproduced:

  fully cold      login 400  (select ce1_0.ID from CLIENT ...)
  CLIENT warm     login 200, refresh 500  <- what A-7 measured
  fully warm      login 200, refresh 200

So "volatile means you can log in without a database" is also conditional:
on a cold start the client lookup itself fails. In each case the Keycloak
log names the failing SQL directly, so this is determined rather than
inferred.

A-7 keeps its original wording with a correction banner above it, so what
was mis-guessed and why stays visible.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-04 20:27:23 +09:00

16 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# A-7a — volatile refresh 500 의 원인 확정 증거
2026-09-04 11:18 11:24 UTC
해설: [`docs/experiment-a7a-volatile-cause.md`](../../experiment-a7a-volatile-cause.md)
| 파일 | 무엇을 보여주는가 |
|---|---|
| `01-cause-determined.txt` | **가설이 틀렸다.** `REVOKED_TOKEN` 이 아니라 `CLIENT_SCOPE_CLIENT` 조회다. 문장 로깅으로 잡고, 실패 로그가 그 SQL 을 직접 지목한다. 그리고 **같은 설정에서 캐시 온도만으로 400/500/200 셋이 나온다** |
## 핵심 네 줄
1. **원인은 선택적 클라이언트 스코프 조회다.** `select cscme1_0.SCOPE_ID from CLIENT_SCOPE_CLIENT where CLIENT_ID=? and DEFAULT_SCOPE=?` — A-7 이 지목한 `REVOKED_TOKEN` 은 로그에 한 번도 안 나온다.
2. **로그인은 SQL 을 0개 쏜다.** refresh 만 이 한 문장을 쏘고, 그것도 **첫 번째만** 쏜다. 이후로는 캐시된다.
3. **A-7 의 표가 조건부였다.** 완전 냉시동이면 로그인부터 400, 캐시가 완전히 더우면 refresh 도 200. A-7 이 본 「로그인 200 · refresh 500」은 그 사이의 한 상태다 — 셋 다 재현했다.
4. **교훈** — volatile + DB 정지의 동작은 "무엇을 하느냐"가 아니라 **"그 경로가 캐시를 채웠느냐"** 로 갈린다. 한 번 재보고 표로 적으면 안 되는 종류의 측정이다.