Joseph Doherty
0771664092
rust / build / test / clippy / fmt (push) Has been cancelled
Investigation triggered by "Publish returns 0 values where .NET sees real
values" against the local AVEVA install.
Three findings:
1. SampleInterval unit: the wire field is **milliseconds**, not 100-ns
ticks. The .NET reference (MxAsbDataClient.cs:441) defaults to
`ulong sampleInterval = 1000` and the probe passes `subscribeSampleMs`
directly through that surface. Sending 10_000_000 (1s in 100-ns ticks)
makes MxDataProvider schedule the next sample ~2.8 hours out; Publish
polls always come back empty until the misinterpreted timer expires.
Fixed in `examples/asb-subscribe.rs` (sample_interval_ticks →
sample_interval_ms = 1000) and clarified in
`MinimalMonitoredItem.sample_interval`'s doc comment with the live-2026-05-06
evidence.
2. result_code=32 is `AsbErrorCode.PublishComplete`
(`AsbResultMapping.cs:37`) — informational, not a fatal error. .NET's
`ToResult` (cs:122-129) explicitly treats it like Success.
`ArchestrAResult.ErrorCode` and `ResultCode` are aliases for the same
`resultCodeField` (cs:424-434), so `publish[i]_error=0x00000020` in
the .NET probe trace = `result_code=Some(32)` in our trace = the same
thing. Already handled correctly via the F26 narrower-bail fix
(commit 983f029) — no code change needed.
3. **F34 filed** for the residual gap: with both sides seeing
result_code=32 + success=false, .NET extracts a value but we extract
zero. Three open hypotheses (wire-shape mismatch / payload-locator
bug / MonitoredItemValue byte-layout bug); all need a middleman
asb-relay.rs trace between the .NET probe and MxDataProvider to
confirm. Adjacent symptom: AddMonitoredItemsResponse Status reads as
0 items where .NET sees 1 — likely the same root cause; one fix
should close both.
Live re-runs to validate the new sample-interval unit were blocked by
the documented F32 InvalidConnectionId transient (the
pending-connection table on MxDataProvider fills up after many
back-to-back test cycles; clears after a 30s+ cool-down).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
design/ — Rust port architectural plan
This folder is the design contract for the Rust replacement of AVEVA/Wonderware MXAccess. It is the gap between the .NET reference in src/ and the Rust crates that will be written under a sibling rust/ workspace (per CLAUDE.md).
The folder is structured as a small set of focused documents. Read in order; each builds on the previous.
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
00-overview.md |
Mission, two-layer goal, architectural principles, non-goals |
10-raw-layer.md |
Byte-accurate raw MXAccess layer (codec + transport + session) |
20-async-layer.md |
Idiomatic Tokio async layer on top of the raw layer |
30-crate-topology.md |
Cargo workspace, crates, dependencies, build/test commands |
40-protocol-invariants.md |
Bill of materials: IIDs, opnums, envelope/handle bytes |
50-error-model.md |
MxStatus, error types, panic/cancellation policy |
60-roadmap.md |
Milestones M0..M6, validation strategy |
70-risks-and-open-questions.md |
Parity gaps, unproven flows, cross-platform constraints |
dependencies.md |
Cross- and within-milestone parallelism map; agent budget per phase |
review.md |
Adversarial review log (BLOCKER/MAJOR/MINOR/NIT findings, all resolved) |
prompt.md |
/loop driver prompt for autonomous M2–M6 execution |
followups.md |
Open / resolved deferred work items; auto-triaged by prompt.md Step 0 (created on first /loop run if missing) |
The design is grounded in the .NET reference at src/ and the protocol artifacts in docs/, analysis/, and captures/. Do not introduce protocol behavior in these documents that is not already proven in the reference. When adding a new claim about wire format, cite either:
- a
.csfile path insrc/MxNativeCodec/,src/MxNativeClient/, orsrc/MxAsbClient/, or - a
docs/*.mdspec file, or - a
captures/0NN-frida-*directory oranalysis/frida/*.tsvrow.
This folder is documentation, not code. When the Rust workspace is created, the design here is the contract it must satisfy. When evidence in captures/ invalidates a design decision here, update the design first, then the code.
Reading order
- New contributor: 00 → 30 → 10 → 40 → 20 → 50 → 60 → 70.
- Protocol question: 40 first, then the relevant section of 10.
- API question: 20 first, then 50.
- Planning a milestone: 60 first, cross-reference 70 for blockers.
- Scheduling concurrent work:
dependencies.mdfor the per-phase parallelism map. - Driving M2–M6 autonomously via
/loop:prompt.md(and thefollowups.mdtriage log it maintains).