Joseph Doherty
20a3eefb1e
Write-completion correlation is recency-based per (server_handle,
item_handle): OnWriteComplete carries no per-call token, so the executor
attributes the first completion whose version exceeds a pre-call baseline
to that write. A stale completion from an earlier timed-out write to the
same handle could ride the next write's reply if it was already queued
when the baseline was captured.
Add CaptureCompletionBaseline (Write, Write2, WriteSecured,
WriteSecured2) to run one pumpStep() immediately before snapshotting
CurrentVersion, so an already-queued stale completion folds into the
baseline instead of being available to the next wait. This narrows, but
per the finding cannot close, the correlation gap -- a completion queued
after the pump step and before the COM call returns (or during the wait)
is still indistinguishable from the new write's own completion; closing
it needs an MXAccess-side correlation token that does not exist.
Rewrite the AwaitWriteCompletion doc comment to state the recency-based
contract honestly instead of implying exact per-call matching, and add
the same contract to docs/MxAccessWorkerInstanceDesign.md's
write-completion section.
Deferred: the reply-field comment in
src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Contracts/Protos/mxaccess_gateway.proto is not
edited here. A comment-only proto change still requires regenerating
every generated artifact (C#, Go, Python, Java, Rust, protoset) in the
same commit per repo convention, and this macOS box cannot verify all
five client generator pins together for a Low-severity doc-only change.
The contract is documented in MxAccessWorkerInstanceDesign.md instead;
the existing proto comment ("concurrent writes... can swap rows") is not
wrong, just less precise than the new doc section.