writeonce/docs/stories/language-runtime-database/refine/24-chat-websocket-workload.md

iteration	status	chain
24	refine	4

Iteration 24 — chat: the WebSocket pub/sub driving workload

Format: fiberloom product/story-iteration-template. Part of Story — one language, one runtime, one database, one binary.

Inserted 2026-08-20 (concurrency-chain refinement): the 8+11 arc's driving workload, the role log-watcher played for iterations 3–7. Needs its spec AFTER the arc's — it lands at the arc's end and proves it.

RE-SEQUENCED 2026-08-21: fourth in the chain, stage 3 → 22 → 31 → 24 → 23 → 32 — chat cannot be written honestly before iteration 31 (request/response, bounded mailboxes, actor death, timers). Iteration 19 LANDED 2026-08-20, so Bytes is available for frame parse/serialize.

Why this iteration exists

Everything the framework ledger parks behind concurrency — WebSockets, pub/sub, streaming, per-request cancellation, the keep-alive parking retirement — needs a workload that actually exercises long-lived connections and cross-shard broadcast, or the arc ships mechanism without proof. Chat is the smallest honest such workload: rooms, N concurrent clients, fan-out on every message, presence on connect/disconnect — one binary, no broker.

Goals

• docs/examples/chat: rooms + broadcast + presence over WebSocket, served by the framework through [deps] exactly as the web-app is.
• Framework grows the WS mechanism in pure .wo: the HTTP/1.1 upgrade handshake (Sec-WebSocket-Accept needs SHA-1/base64 — the crypto-builtin fork's first real consumer), frame parse/serialize (text, close, ping), fiber-per-connection serving (iteration 11), and in-memory channels whose delivery is cross-shard message send (iteration 8).
• The arc's acceptance teeth: 1k concurrent clients across shards, broadcast latency measured, starvation-free under one hot room, SIGTERM drains every connection cleanly.

Acceptance Criteria (draft — the spec after the arc refines)

• Given two clients in one room on DIFFERENT shards, when one sends, then the other receives the frame (cross-shard ownership-move delivery), and a third client in another room receives nothing.
• Given 1k connected clients with one hot sender, when the reduction budget preempts, then every room keeps making progress (no starvation) on one OS thread per core, verified by TID.
• Given SIGTERM with clients connected, when the server drains, then every connection gets a close frame, every fiber unwinds its drop maps (ASan zero leaks), and the process exits 0.
• Given the web-app running beside chat features, when the standing gates run, then nothing regresses — HTTP and WS share the serve loop honestly.

Out Of Scope

Message persistence/history (a @table an app adds if it wants — not the workload's point); auth beyond the existing bearer mechanism; permessage compression; binary frames beyond echo coverage; wss (TLS stays at the proxy — the proxy story extends to WS pass-through, documented).

Info

• Dependencies: the 8+11 arc (fibers + cross-shard send — stages 1+2 landed 2026-08-20, stage 3 pending), iteration 31 (request/response, backpressure, death, timers — the mechanisms rooms and presence are made of), iteration 19 (LANDED 2026-08-20 — Bytes carries the frames), the crypto builtins fork (SHA-1 for the upgrade handshake — note: the ledger's crypto slice lists SHA-256/512; the WS handshake specifically needs SHA-1, so the builtin set must include it), and the framework's parse seam (upgrade is an HTTP request until it isn't).
• Unparks on landing: the framework ledger's WebSocket/pub-sub rows and the iteration-18 rejection note ("pub/sub REJECTED until 8/11").

Proposed Solution

Brainstorm → spec → plan after the arc's spec exists; the arc's plan and this iteration's are written against each other (the arc names chat as its acceptance, chat names the arc as its substrate).