# Batch 33 JS Cluster Streams Design **Date:** 2026-02-27 **Batch:** 33 (`JS Cluster Streams`) **Scope:** 58 features + 22 unit tests **Dependency:** batch `32` (`JS Cluster Meta`) **Go source:** `golang/nats-server/server/jetstream_cluster.go` ## Problem Batch 33 ports JetStream cluster stream/consumer assignment execution paths from `server/jetstream_cluster.go`, covering cluster monitoring loops, metadata snapshots, raft-group creation, stream-entry application, leader-change advisories, and stream/consumer create-update-delete flows. The mapped tests are spread across JetStream cluster, monitor, JWT, concurrency, and raft suites. The design objective is to define a strict, auditable implementation path that avoids placeholder code and only advances tracker statuses with build/test evidence. ## Context Findings ### Required command outputs - `batch show 33 --db porting.db` - Status: `pending` - Features: `58` (all `deferred`) - Tests: `22` (all `deferred`) - Depends on: `32` - Go file: `server/jetstream_cluster.go` - `batch list --db porting.db` - Batch chain includes `32 -> 33 -> 34` for JS cluster progression. - `report summary --db porting.db` - Overall progress: `1924/6942 (27.7%)` Note: in this environment, `dotnet` is not on `PATH`; use `/usr/local/share/dotnet/dotnet` when needed. ### Current .NET state relevant to Batch 33 - Cluster data structures exist in `dotnet/src/ZB.MOM.NatsNet.Server/JetStream/JetStreamClusterTypes.cs`. - Core types exist in: - `dotnet/src/ZB.MOM.NatsNet.Server/JetStream/JetStreamTypes.cs` - `dotnet/src/ZB.MOM.NatsNet.Server/JetStream/NatsStream.cs` - `dotnet/src/ZB.MOM.NatsNet.Server/Accounts/Account.cs` - `dotnet/src/ZB.MOM.NatsNet.Server/NatsServer.*.cs` (partial server files) - Backlog test coverage is mostly placeholder-level today; `JetStreamClusterTests2.Impltests.cs` is present, while several mapped classes (for example `JetStreamClusterTests3`, `JetStreamClusterLongTests`, `RaftNodeTests`) still need concrete batch coverage. ## Clarified Constraints - Planning only in this session: no implementation execution. - Mandatory guardrails from Batch 0 must be carried forward and adapted to features + tests. - Feature work must be chunked into groups of at most ~20 features. - Status updates must use `batch-update` chunks of max 15 IDs. ## Approaches ### Approach A: Monolithic pass (all 58 features + 22 tests) - Pros: fewer task boundaries. - Cons: weak traceability and high risk of hidden stubs/regressions. ### Approach B (Recommended): Three feature groups + three test waves with hard checkpoints - Pros: bounded scope per task, stronger verification evidence, easier rollback/debug. - Cons: more command overhead and checkpoint ceremony. ### Approach C: Test-heavy-first before major feature porting - Pros: early behavior signal. - Cons: high churn because many mapped tests depend on stream/consumer cluster plumbing not yet ported. **Decision:** Approach B. ## Proposed Design ### 1. File ownership model - `JetStream` cluster stream orchestration methods in `JetStreamTypes.cs` or a new focused partial file (`JetStream.ClusterStreams.cs`). - `NatsStream` raft/cluster helpers in `NatsStream.cs` or `NatsStream.Cluster.cs`. - `RaftGroup`, `StreamAssignment`, `ConsumerAssignment`, and cluster helpers in `JetStreamClusterTypes.cs` (or focused partials if split improves reviewability). - Server-facing operations and advisories in a new/updated server partial (`NatsServer.JetStreamClusterStreams.cs`). ### 2. Feature slicing (max ~20 each) - **Feature Group A (20 IDs):** cluster monitor + snapshot/recovery primitives IDs: `1578-1597` - **Feature Group B (20 IDs):** meta-entry application + raft-group/stream monitoring + leader-change core IDs: `1598-1617` - **Feature Group C (18 IDs):** advisory + stream assignment/process lifecycle + consumer assignment/process lifecycle IDs: `1618-1635` ### 3. Test slicing - **Test Wave T1 (5 IDs):** cluster long-path + JWT/monitor/concurrency anchors IDs: `1118,1214,1402,2144,2504` - **Test Wave T2 (9 IDs):** raft elections and term behavior (early raft set) IDs: `2616,2620,2622,2624,2627,2628,2630,2631,2634` - **Test Wave T3 (8 IDs):** raft replay/catchup/chain-of-blocks paths IDs: `2637,2638,2652,2657,2670,2671,2698,2699` ### 4. Verification architecture - Per-feature loop: `feature show` -> focused failing test -> minimal implementation -> stub scan -> build gate -> targeted test gate -> status transition. - Per-test loop: `test show` -> Go behavioral port -> single-test run evidence -> class-level run -> status transition. - Checkpoint after every feature group and test wave, including full unit suite run. ### 5. Deferred handling model If blocked by missing dependency behavior/infrastructure, immediately mark item `deferred` with explicit reason via `--override`; do not leave stubs in source or tests. ## Risks and Mitigations - **Dependency risk:** Batch 32 is prerequisite. **Mitigation:** block all Batch 33 status transitions until dependency preflight confirms readiness. - **Stub-risk in backlog tests:** existing placeholder-style tests can produce false progress. **Mitigation:** required stub scan + assertion-quality checks + single-test execution evidence. - **Ownership ambiguity risk:** methods span `JetStream`, `NatsStream`, `JetStreamCluster`, `NatsServer`. **Mitigation:** explicit file ownership map and grouped tasking by domain. ## Success Criteria - All 58 features are either `verified` with evidence or `deferred` with explicit blocker reason. - All 22 tests are either `verified` with evidence or `deferred` with explicit blocker reason. - No forbidden stub patterns in touched files. - Batch progress is auditable from command outputs and chunked status updates. ## Non-Goals - Executing the implementation in this document. - Extending scope into Batch 34/35. - Building full distributed integration harness beyond mapped unit/backlog verification needs.