shoney.arickathil
296efb52ed
- story 02: `status: done`, `review_pending` (forks 1–7 auto-approved for
autonomy); progress rows 6a ✅, 6b ➡ databasev2 5 Phase A, 7 `a310496`;
5c/5d rows cite the `dev` hashes (the pre-merge ones were unreachable);
task 6a's Given/When/Then met; Info records the seven forks (sentinel over
`:memory:`, its rules, the refusal contract, startup-only, the budget
leaves for 5, library-owned tables bind consumers, the v8 table bit);
History keeps the first cut that refused every class-bearing program
- database/src/CODE-LOGIC.md: "Startup refusal + WO_EPHEMERAL" — contract,
hatch, table bit, measured blast radius, deferred items, proof; the
dispatcher paragraph no longer says a failed commit un-applies the row
(fatal since databasev2 4 part A; WO_T_IO unreachable from a write path)
- residency spec + plan: task 6 items annotated with the 2026-09-09
decisions; the byte budget marked moved to databasev2 5
- README, seven example READMEs and four guides carry the one-line rule
(durable default refuses without WO_DATA; WO_EPHEMERAL=1; durable:
false); shop's RAM-only command sets the sentinel
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
(cherry picked from commit 2c3531998124042fe736388e8b926abda3841194)
47 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
47 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
# employee-list — program B: attach, authenticate, read
|
|
|
|
> **Status: target workload — does not compile on today's toolchain.**
|
|
> Written ahead of iterations
|
|
> [9 (cross-program tables)](../../stories/databasev2/09-cross-program-tables.md)
|
|
> and [10 (keypair attach auth)](../../stories/databasev2/10-keypair-attach-auth.md),
|
|
> the way every acceptance sample here precedes its features. It also leans
|
|
> on 9/9b (the [employee sample](../employee/) it attaches to must run
|
|
> first).
|
|
|
|
Two programs, one database, one writer:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
employee (A) employee-list (B)
|
|
owns WO_DATA + WAL no database of its own
|
|
[share] listen = unix:...sock [connect.employee] ipc = unix:...sock
|
|
[[share.clients]] public_key = <A's fingerprint, pinned>
|
|
public_key = <B's fingerprint> project = ../employee (shapes)
|
|
rights = "read"
|
|
▲ │
|
|
└── every statement executes here ◄───┘ (typed, over the wire)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The manifests are the design: **A grants, B pins.** A's `[share]` names B's
|
|
public-key fingerprint with rights (`read` here); B's `[connect.employee]`
|
|
names A's IPC string AND A's fingerprint, so neither side talks to an
|
|
impostor. Fingerprints are printed by each program's `--identity` after
|
|
first boot (keys are generated into `WO_DATA`, never written into a toml)
|
|
and pasted — the `PASTE-…-HERE` placeholders mark exactly where. The
|
|
connect-section name is the code's namespace: `[connect.employee]` is why
|
|
the source says `employee.Employee`.
|
|
|
|
B declares the shapes but stores nothing, so it runs under `WO_EPHEMERAL=1`: a
|
|
program with any durable table (the default) refuses to start without
|
|
`WO_DATA`; `WO_EPHEMERAL=1` opts into a RAM-only run, `@table(durable: false)`
|
|
opts a table out.
|
|
|
|
| Mode | What it proves |
|
|
| --- | --- |
|
|
| `employee-list list` | typed reads over the wire, `e.dept.name` ref navigation executing inside A |
|
|
| `employee-list report` | **byte-identical output to A's own `report`** — attach + GroupBy compose, the wire changes nothing |
|
|
| `employee-list staff <dept>` | unique-name index probe + `staff` backlink scan, both in A |
|
|
| `employee-list probe-write` | the rights matrix: registered read-only, so the insert traps with access-denied (caught, `DENIED …`, exit 4) and A's row count is unchanged |
|
|
|
|
The 21 acceptance drives the rest from the outside: wrong key, no key,
|
|
same-uid-wrong-key, impostor socket, handshake replay, key rotation — see
|
|
the iteration's criteria; this sample is the workload they run against.
|