fix(localdb): refuse cascade-delete FK parents; make one entry's row+ledger writes atomic (0.3.3, ScadaBridge arch-review P4-7)

Two halves of the same INSERT OR REPLACE hazard in the LWW apply path. Wire-compatible
with every earlier peer: no proto change, no lib_schema_version bump, no on-disk schema
change.

1. RegisterReplicated now REFUSES a table that another table references with a
   row-mutating ON DELETE action (CASCADE / SET NULL / SET DEFAULT). Applying a remote row
   uses INSERT OR REPLACE, whose implicit DELETE fires that referential action — while the
   apply path holds the capture guard raised, precisely so its own writes are not
   re-captured. The child rows it deletes or nulls therefore produce no oplog entry: the
   peer keeps them and the pair diverges with nothing reporting a fault. Registration is
   the only point at which the problem is still visible, so it is refused there with an
   actionable LocalDbRegistrationException naming the referencing table and its action.
   NO ACTION / RESTRICT stay allowed: they mutate no child row, so the implicit delete just
   fails and the applier dead-letters the entry — loud, not silent. Registration-time only;
   a cascading child table created LATER is not caught (SQLite offers no DDL hook).

   No current consumer has a foreign key on a replicated table (ScadaBridge's ten tables
   have none), so this is a guard against a future foot-gun, not a live fix.

2. One entry's row write and its ledger write are now atomic. They were two statements
   under the poison catch, so a failure landing between them committed a deleted/replaced
   row carrying a STALE LIVE row-version entry — exactly the shape SnapshotStreamer warns
   about and skips, so that key never travels again and the pair is permanently divergent
   for it. A per-entry SAVEPOINT makes the pair all-or-nothing while keeping the catch's
   per-ENTRY granularity: entries applied earlier in the same batch survive the rollback,
   the poison entry is still dead-lettered, and the batch still continues. The RELEASE runs
   outside the catch on purpose, so a failure there rolls the whole batch back rather than
   being swallowed as poison. Measured cost on a 100k-row backlog drain: ~7%
   (178.6k rows/s -> 166.1k rows/s).

Tests: both hazards proven against the unfixed code first (FK parent registered silently;
an injected ledger-write abort left the row deleted with a live ledger entry). Adds FK
guard coverage (parent refused, child allowed, SET NULL / SET DEFAULT refused, NO ACTION /
RESTRICT allowed, unrelated cascades ignored) and two applier atomicity tests. The
statement-count lock-in moves 7 -> 9 for the two new savepoint statements.

Version 0.3.2 -> 0.3.3; README limitations + release notes document the constraint.

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/Directory.Build.props

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
     <Nullable>enable</Nullable>
     <ImplicitUsings>enable</ImplicitUsings>
     <LangVersion>latest</LangVersion>
-    <Version>0.3.2</Version>
+    <Version>0.3.3</Version>
     <ManagePackageVersionsCentrally>true</ManagePackageVersionsCentrally>
     <TreatWarningsAsErrors>true</TreatWarningsAsErrors>
     <!-- NU1510 (package-pruning advice): the Replication and Tests projects carry a

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/README.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Change capture uses SQLite triggers writing a single HLC-stamped oplog inside th
 consumer's own write transaction (crash-consistent, non-bypassable). Convergence is
 last-writer-wins over a hybrid logical clock. All timestamps are UTC.
 
-## Packages (all `0.3.2`)
+## Packages (all `0.3.3`)
 
 | Package | Contents |
 |---|---|
@@ -20,6 +20,25 @@ last-writer-wins over a hybrid logical clock. All timestamps are UTC.
 
 > Status: **published to the Gitea feed; adopted by ScadaBridge (Phases 1+2) and OtOpcUa (Phase 1).**
 >
+> - `0.3.3` (2026-08-19) — one Low finding from the ScadaBridge adversarial architecture review
+>   (P4-7), in two halves. Wire-compatible with every earlier peer: no proto change, no
+>   `lib_schema_version` bump, no on-disk schema change.
+>   - **`RegisterReplicated` now refuses a table that another table cascades a DELETE onto.**
+>     Applying a remote row uses `INSERT OR REPLACE`, whose implicit DELETE fires `ON DELETE
+>     CASCADE` / `SET NULL` / `SET DEFAULT` on every child — while the apply path holds the capture
+>     guard raised, so the child rows it touches produce no oplog entry, the peer keeps them, and the
+>     pair diverges with nothing reporting a fault. Registration is the only place that is visible,
+>     so it is refused there with an actionable `LocalDbRegistrationException` naming the referencing
+>     table and its action. `NO ACTION` / `RESTRICT` are still allowed: they mutate no child row (the
+>     implicit delete simply fails, which the applier dead-letters — loud, not silent). No current
+>     consumer has a foreign key on a replicated table, so this is a guard against a future foot-gun
+>     rather than a live fix.
+>   - **Applying one entry is atomic across its row write and its ledger write.** They were two
+>     statements under the poison catch, so a failure landing between them committed a
+>     deleted/replaced row carrying a STALE LIVE ledger version — the shape `SnapshotStreamer` warns
+>     about and skips, meaning that key never travels again. A per-entry `SAVEPOINT` makes the pair
+>     all-or-nothing while keeping the catch's per-ENTRY granularity: entries applied earlier in the
+>     same batch survive, and the poison entry is still dead-lettered and the batch still continues.
 > - `0.3.2` (2026-08-19) — two Medium findings from the ScadaBridge adversarial architecture review
 >   (P4-1, P4-3). Wire-compatible with every earlier peer: no proto change, no `lib_schema_version`
 >   bump, no on-disk schema change — the keepalive is transport-level and the rest is local policy.
@@ -260,6 +279,18 @@ All options are validated at startup (`ZB.MOM.WW.Configuration` validators).
   `RegisterReplicated`, because `json_object` cannot capture it). A *typeless* column can
   still hold a BLOB value at runtime, which then surfaces as a write-time error, not a
   registration error.
+- **Replicated tables must not be cascade-delete foreign-key parents.** If another table
+  references the one you are registering with `ON DELETE CASCADE` (or `SET NULL` /
+  `SET DEFAULT`), `RegisterReplicated` throws. Applying a remote row uses `INSERT OR
+  REPLACE`, whose implicit DELETE fires that referential action while change capture is
+  suppressed — so the child rows it deletes or nulls are never captured, the peer keeps
+  them, and the pair diverges with nothing reporting a fault. Model the parent/child
+  relationship with `ON DELETE NO ACTION` (or `RESTRICT`) and delete children explicitly, or
+  leave the parent unreplicated. `NO ACTION` / `RESTRICT` are allowed because they mutate no
+  child row: the implicit delete just fails, and the applier dead-letters the entry — loud,
+  not silent. The check runs at **registration time**, so a cascading child table created
+  *later* is not caught (SQLite offers no DDL hook); register after schema setup, which is
+  where startup does it anyway.
 - **CDC semantics** — rows that existed **before** `RegisterReplicated` are not captured
   and are not snapshotted; only changes after registration are replicated. **Opt out with
   `RegisterReplicated(table, baselineExistingRows: true)`**, which seeds the row-version

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/src/ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb.Replication/Internal/LwwApplier.cs

@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ internal sealed record ApplyResult(long AppliedThruSeq, int Applied, int Discard
 /// row-version (hlc, then node_id ordinal tie-break), poison rows are dead-lettered while the
 /// batch continues, and the remote watermark advances in the SAME transaction as the data so a
 /// crash-replay of the batch is a no-op (LWW's strict-greater compare loses on equal versions).
+/// Each entry's row write and its ledger write are additionally scoped by a per-entry SAVEPOINT, so
+/// the pair is all-or-nothing even when the poison catch keeps the batch alive around it.
 /// This never writes <c>__localdb_oplog</c>: the 2-node topology does not re-forward applied deltas.
 /// </summary>
 /// <remarks>
@@ -88,6 +90,18 @@ internal sealed class LwwApplier(SqliteLocalDb db, Func<DateTimeOffset>? utcNow
                 continue;
             }
 
+            // The row mutation and its ledger entry are TWO statements and must land together or
+            // not at all: a failure between them commits a deleted/replaced row carrying a stale
+            // ledger version, which SnapshotStreamer then warns about and skips — so that key never
+            // travels again and the pair is silently, permanently divergent for it. A per-entry
+            // savepoint makes the pair atomic without giving up the poison catch's per-ENTRY
+            // granularity (the surrounding transaction, and every entry already applied in it,
+            // survives a rollback to the savepoint). Cost measured on the path that matters — a
+            // 100 000-row backlog drain — is ~7% (178.6k rows/s → 166.1k rows/s): the two extra
+            // statements are prepared once like the rest and neither one touches the disk, since
+            // an inner savepoint's release just merges into the enclosing transaction.
+            var pairApplied = false;
+            await sql.SavepointAsync(ct);
             try
             {
                 var table = db.ReplicatedTables[entry.TableName];
@@ -97,7 +111,7 @@ internal sealed class LwwApplier(SqliteLocalDb db, Func<DateTimeOffset>? utcNow
                     await sql.UpsertAsync(table, entry.RowJson!, ct);
 
                 await sql.WriteRowVersionAsync(entry, utcNow, ct);
-                applied++;
+                pairApplied = true;
             }
             catch (SqliteException ex)
             {
@@ -105,9 +119,21 @@ internal sealed class LwwApplier(SqliteLocalDb db, Func<DateTimeOffset>? utcNow
                 // malformed row_json) are treated as per-entry poison — SQLite aborts just the
                 // statement, not the transaction, so the batch continues after dead-lettering.
                 // Any other exception propagates and rolls back the whole batch (fail-closed).
+                // The rollback comes FIRST so the dead-letter row it records is not discarded with
+                // the half-applied pair.
+                await sql.RollbackToSavepointAsync(ct);
                 await sql.DeadLetterAsync(entry, ex.Message, utcNow, ct);
                 deadLettered++;
             }
+
+            // Released outside the catch on purpose: a RELEASE that itself fails means the
+            // transaction is no longer sound, and there is no savepoint state left to reason about,
+            // so it propagates and rolls the whole batch back rather than being swallowed as poison.
+            if (pairApplied)
+            {
+                await sql.ReleaseSavepointAsync(ct);
+                applied++;
+            }
         }
 
         await sql.AdvancePeerStateAsync(maxSeq, maxHlc, utcNow, ct);
@@ -143,10 +169,42 @@ internal sealed class LwwApplier(SqliteLocalDb db, Func<DateTimeOffset>? utcNow
         private SqliteCommand? _rowVersion;
         private SqliteCommand? _deadLetter;
         private SqliteCommand? _peerState;
+        private SqliteCommand? _savepoint;
+        private SqliteCommand? _releaseSavepoint;
+        private SqliteCommand? _rollbackToSavepoint;
+
+        /// <summary>The per-entry savepoint's name. Reused for every entry — one is open at a time.</summary>
+        private const string SavepointName = "__localdb_apply_entry";
 
         /// <summary>How many distinct statements this set has prepared.</summary>
         public int StatementCount => _owned.Count;
 
+        /// <summary>Opens the per-entry savepoint that scopes one entry's row + ledger writes.</summary>
+        public Task SavepointAsync(CancellationToken ct)
+        {
+            var cmd = _savepoint ??= Create("SAVEPOINT " + SavepointName);
+            return cmd.ExecuteNonQueryAsync(ct);
+        }
+
+        /// <summary>Commits the entry's savepoint into the surrounding batch transaction.</summary>
+        public Task ReleaseSavepointAsync(CancellationToken ct)
+        {
+            var cmd = _releaseSavepoint ??= Create("RELEASE " + SavepointName);
+            return cmd.ExecuteNonQueryAsync(ct);
+        }
+
+        /// <summary>
+        /// Undoes everything the entry did and closes its savepoint. ROLLBACK TO leaves the savepoint
+        /// OPEN, so the RELEASE is required — without it the names would nest one deeper per poison
+        /// entry and the next rollback would unwind more than one entry's work.
+        /// </summary>
+        public async Task RollbackToSavepointAsync(CancellationToken ct)
+        {
+            var cmd = _rollbackToSavepoint ??= Create("ROLLBACK TO " + SavepointName);
+            await cmd.ExecuteNonQueryAsync(ct);
+            await ReleaseSavepointAsync(ct);
+        }
+
         public Task SetApplyingAsync(int value, CancellationToken ct)
         {
             var cmd = _applying ??= Create(

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/src/ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/ILocalDb.cs

@@ -38,8 +38,18 @@ public interface ILocalDb
     /// schema digest, and installs the three AFTER triggers that capture every change into the
     /// oplog + row-version tables within the same transaction as the consumer's write. Idempotent
     /// (re-registering regenerates the triggers). Throws <see cref="LocalDbRegistrationException"/>
-    /// if the name is unsafe, the table is missing, or it has no primary key.
+    /// if the name is unsafe, the table is missing, it has no primary key, it has a BLOB column, or
+    /// another table references it with a row-mutating <c>ON DELETE</c> action.
     /// </summary>
+    /// <remarks>
+    /// <b>Replicated tables must not be cascade-delete foreign-key parents.</b> Applying a remote row
+    /// uses <c>INSERT OR REPLACE</c>, whose implicit DELETE fires <c>ON DELETE CASCADE</c> /
+    /// <c>SET NULL</c> / <c>SET DEFAULT</c> on referencing tables while change capture is suppressed
+    /// — the child rows it touches are never captured, so the peer keeps them and the pair diverges
+    /// silently. Such a table is refused here, because registration is the only point at which the
+    /// problem is still visible. <c>NO ACTION</c> / <c>RESTRICT</c> are allowed: they mutate no child
+    /// row, so the implicit delete simply fails and the applier dead-letters the entry.
+    /// </remarks>
     ReplicatedTable RegisterReplicated(string tableName);
 
     /// <summary>

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/src/ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/Internal/SqliteLocalDb.cs

@@ -199,6 +199,8 @@ internal sealed class SqliteLocalDb : ILocalDb, IDisposable
                 throw new LocalDbRegistrationException(
                     $"Cannot register table '{tableName}': replication requires an explicit primary key.");
 
+            EnsureNoRowMutatingDeleteAction(tableName);
+
             var allColumns = columns.Select(c => (c.Name, c.Type)).ToList();
             var digest = ReplicatedTable.ComputeDigest(tableName, pkColumns, allColumns);
             var table = new ReplicatedTable(tableName, pkColumns, allColumns, digest);
@@ -293,6 +295,87 @@ internal sealed class SqliteLocalDb : ILocalDb, IDisposable
         }
     }
 
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Refuses to register <paramref name="tableName"/> when another table references it with an
+    /// <c>ON DELETE</c> action that MUTATES the referencing rows (<c>CASCADE</c>, <c>SET NULL</c>,
+    /// <c>SET DEFAULT</c>).
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <remarks>
+    /// <para>
+    /// <b>Why this is a replication correctness rule and not a schema opinion.</b> Applying a peer's
+    /// row runs <c>INSERT OR REPLACE</c>, and REPLACE resolves a primary-key conflict by DELETING the
+    /// existing row first. Connections run with <c>PRAGMA foreign_keys=ON</c>, so that implicit delete
+    /// fires the referential action on every child table — while the apply path holds the capture
+    /// guard raised, precisely so its own writes are not re-captured. The child rows are therefore
+    /// deleted (or nulled) locally and produce NO oplog entry: the peer never hears about them, keeps
+    /// them, and the pair is durably divergent with nothing anywhere reporting a fault.
+    /// </para>
+    /// <para>
+    /// Refusing at registration is the only place the problem is visible. At apply time the damage is
+    /// already done and indistinguishable from a normal write, and no runtime signal exists to detect
+    /// it. <b>NO ACTION / RESTRICT are deliberately allowed</b>: they mutate no child row — the
+    /// implicit delete simply fails, which the applier surfaces as a dead-lettered entry. Loud, not
+    /// silent, so there is nothing to guard.
+    /// </para>
+    /// <para>
+    /// The check is registration-time, so a cascading child table CREATED LATER is not caught (SQLite
+    /// has no DDL hook to catch it on). Registration normally runs at startup after schema setup,
+    /// which is where the constraint belongs.
+    /// </para>
+    /// </remarks>
+    private void EnsureNoRowMutatingDeleteAction(string tableName)
+    {
+        var candidates = new List<string>();
+        using (var cmd = _master.CreateCommand())
+        {
+            // Every user table is a candidate CHILD; the internal sqlite_* tables carry no
+            // foreign keys. The registered table itself is included: a self-referencing cascade
+            // is the same hazard.
+            cmd.CommandText = "SELECT name FROM sqlite_master WHERE type = 'table' AND name NOT LIKE 'sqlite_%'";
+            using var reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();
+            while (reader.Read())
+                candidates.Add(reader.GetString(0));
+        }
+
+        foreach (var child in candidates)
+        {
+            using var cmd = _master.CreateCommand();
+            cmd.CommandText = $"PRAGMA foreign_key_list({TriggerSqlGenerator.Ident(child)})";
+            using var reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();
+            while (reader.Read())
+            {
+                // foreign_key_list cols: 0=id, 1=seq, 2=table (the PARENT), 3=from, 4=to,
+                // 5=on_update, 6=on_delete, 7=match.
+                var parent = reader.IsDBNull(2) ? "" : reader.GetString(2);
+                // SQLite identifiers are case-insensitive, and the REFERENCES clause need not
+                // match the CREATE TABLE spelling.
+                if (!string.Equals(parent, tableName, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase))
+                    continue;
+
+                var onDelete = reader.IsDBNull(6) ? "" : reader.GetString(6);
+                if (!RowMutatingDeleteActions.Contains(onDelete))
+                    continue;
+
+                throw new LocalDbRegistrationException(
+                    $"Cannot register table '{tableName}': table '{child}' has a foreign key referencing it " +
+                    $"with ON DELETE {onDelete}. Replicated tables must not be cascade-delete foreign-key " +
+                    "parents: applying a remote row uses INSERT OR REPLACE, whose implicit DELETE fires the " +
+                    "referential action while change capture is suppressed — the child rows it touches are " +
+                    "never captured, so the peer never learns of them and the two nodes diverge silently. " +
+                    $"Drop the referential action on '{child}' (ON DELETE NO ACTION, removing children " +
+                    "explicitly instead), or do not replicate this table.");
+            }
+        }
+    }
+
+    /// <summary>
+    /// The <c>ON DELETE</c> actions that mutate referencing rows, as SQLite spells them in
+    /// <c>PRAGMA foreign_key_list</c>. NO ACTION / RESTRICT are absent on purpose — see
+    /// <see cref="EnsureNoRowMutatingDeleteAction"/>.
+    /// </summary>
+    private static readonly HashSet<string> RowMutatingDeleteActions =
+        new(["CASCADE", "SET NULL", "SET DEFAULT"], StringComparer.OrdinalIgnoreCase);
+
     /// <summary>
     /// Seeds <c>__localdb_row_version</c> at the baseline floor for every row of
     /// <paramref name="table"/> that has no ledger entry, and flags a snapshot resync if it seeded

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/tests/ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb.Tests/LwwApplierTests.cs

@@ -427,9 +427,12 @@ public sealed class LwwApplierTests : IDisposable
         var result = await applier.ApplyBatchAsync(entries, default);
 
         Assert.Equal(202, result.Applied);
-        // Four table-independent statements (applying guard, version lookup, row-version write,
-        // peer state), plus an upsert per table touched and a delete for the one table tombstoned.
-        Assert.Equal(7, applier.LastBatchStatementCount);
+        // Six table-independent statements (applying guard, version lookup, row-version write,
+        // peer state, plus the per-entry savepoint's SAVEPOINT and RELEASE), an upsert per table
+        // touched, and a delete for the one table tombstoned. The savepoint's ROLLBACK TO and the
+        // dead-letter insert are absent because this batch has no poison entry — statements are
+        // built on first use, so the count tracks the statement KINDS the batch actually ran.
+        Assert.Equal(9, applier.LastBatchStatementCount);
 
         // ...and the batch is still correct, statement reuse notwithstanding.
         Assert.Null(await ReadOrder(db, 1));
@@ -462,6 +465,72 @@ public sealed class LwwApplierTests : IDisposable
         Assert.Equal(("LAST", (long?)5), await ReadOrder(db, 5));
     }
 
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Apply_LedgerWriteFails_LeavesNeitherTheDeleteNorTheLedgerEntry()
+    {
+        // The hazard (P4-7): applying a tombstone is TWO statements — delete the row, then write the
+        // ledger's tombstone version — and the poison catch commits whatever the first one already
+        // did. A failure landing between them therefore committed a DELETED ROW carrying a STALE LIVE
+        // ledger entry, which is exactly the shape SnapshotStreamer warns about and skips: the key
+        // then never travels again and the pair is divergent for that row, permanently and silently.
+        //
+        // The failure is injected with a trigger that aborts the ledger write (in production the
+        // realistic causes are disk-full / IO error / corruption — none of them reproducible here),
+        // and RAISE(ABORT) aborts only the statement, so the applier's narrow SqliteException catch
+        // treats it as per-entry poison exactly as it would a real one.
+        using var db = await NewOrdersDb();
+        await db.ExecuteAsync("INSERT INTO orders (id, sku, qty) VALUES (1, 'LOCAL', 5)");
+        var localHlc = await RowVersionHlc(db, Pk1);
+
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TRIGGER poison_ledger BEFORE INSERT ON __localdb_row_version " +
+            "WHEN NEW.is_tombstone = 1 BEGIN SELECT RAISE(ABORT, 'injected ledger failure'); END");
+
+        var result = await new LwwApplier(db).ApplyBatchAsync(
+            [Entry(90, Pk1, null, localHlc + 1000, "remote-node", tombstone: true)], default);
+
+        // The entry is poison, so it is dead-lettered and the batch continues — unchanged semantics.
+        Assert.Equal(1, result.DeadLettered);
+        Assert.Equal(0, result.Applied);
+
+        // BOTH or NEITHER. Neither, here: the row must still be present, because its ledger entry
+        // still says "live at the local version".
+        Assert.Equal(("LOCAL", (long?)5), await ReadOrder(db, 1));
+        var rv = await db.QueryAsync(
+            "SELECT hlc, is_tombstone FROM __localdb_row_version WHERE table_name = 'orders' AND pk_json = @pk",
+            x => (Hlc: x.GetInt64(0), Tomb: x.GetInt64(1)), new { pk = Pk1 });
+        Assert.Single(rv);
+        Assert.Equal(localHlc, rv[0].Hlc);
+        Assert.Equal(0, rv[0].Tomb);
+    }
+
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Apply_LedgerWriteFails_MidBatch_LeavesTheOtherEntriesApplied()
+    {
+        // The atomicity must be per-ENTRY, not per-batch: rolling back to the savepoint may not
+        // discard the rows applied before the poison one, nor block the ones after it.
+        using var db = await NewOrdersDb();
+        await db.ExecuteAsync("INSERT INTO orders (id, sku, qty) VALUES (2, 'DOOMED', 2)");
+        var doomedHlc = await RowVersionHlc(db, "{\"id\":2}");
+
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TRIGGER poison_ledger BEFORE INSERT ON __localdb_row_version " +
+            "WHEN NEW.is_tombstone = 1 BEGIN SELECT RAISE(ABORT, 'injected ledger failure'); END");
+
+        var result = await new LwwApplier(db).ApplyBatchAsync(
+        [
+            Entry(91, Pk1, "{\"id\":1,\"sku\":\"BEFORE\",\"qty\":1}", doomedHlc + 1, "remote-node"),
+            Entry(92, "{\"id\":2}", null, doomedHlc + 1000, "remote-node", tombstone: true),
+            Entry(93, "{\"id\":3}", "{\"id\":3,\"sku\":\"AFTER\",\"qty\":3}", doomedHlc + 3, "remote-node"),
+        ], default);
+
+        Assert.Equal(2, result.Applied);
+        Assert.Equal(1, result.DeadLettered);
+        Assert.Equal(("BEFORE", (long?)1), await ReadOrder(db, 1));
+        Assert.Equal(("DOOMED", (long?)2), await ReadOrder(db, 2));
+        Assert.Equal(("AFTER", (long?)3), await ReadOrder(db, 3));
+    }
+
     [Fact]
     public async Task Apply_ReplaceExistingRow_DoesNotFireCaptureTriggers()
     {

ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb/tests/ZB.MOM.WW.LocalDb.Tests/RegistrationTests.cs

@@ -70,6 +70,97 @@ public sealed class RegistrationTests : IDisposable
         Assert.Contains("BLOB", ex.Message);
     }
 
+    // ---- Cascading-delete foreign-key parents (P4-7) --------------------------------------
+
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Register_CascadeDeleteFkParent_Throws()
+    {
+        // The hazard: applying a remote row uses INSERT OR REPLACE, whose implicit DELETE fires
+        // ON DELETE CASCADE while the capture guard is RAISED — so the cascaded child rows are
+        // deleted locally and never captured, and the peer keeps them forever.
+        using var db = Create();
+        await CreateOrders(db);
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TABLE order_lines (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, order_id INTEGER " +
+            "REFERENCES orders(id) ON DELETE CASCADE)");
+
+        var ex = Assert.Throws<LocalDbRegistrationException>(() => db.RegisterReplicated("orders"));
+        Assert.Contains("orders", ex.Message);
+        Assert.Contains("order_lines", ex.Message);
+        Assert.Contains("ON DELETE CASCADE", ex.Message);
+
+        // Refused means refused: no triggers installed, nothing in the registry.
+        Assert.Empty(await Triggers(db));
+        Assert.False(db.ReplicatedTables.ContainsKey("orders"));
+    }
+
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Register_CascadeDeleteFkChild_IsAllowed()
+    {
+        // Only the PARENT is refused. The child side is safe: replacing a child row cascades
+        // nothing, and the child's own deletes are captured normally.
+        using var db = Create();
+        await CreateOrders(db);
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TABLE order_lines (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, order_id INTEGER " +
+            "REFERENCES orders(id) ON DELETE CASCADE)");
+
+        db.RegisterReplicated("order_lines");
+
+        Assert.True(db.ReplicatedTables.ContainsKey("order_lines"));
+    }
+
+    [Theory]
+    [InlineData("ON DELETE SET NULL", "ON DELETE SET NULL")]
+    [InlineData("ON DELETE SET DEFAULT", "ON DELETE SET DEFAULT")]
+    public async Task Register_OtherRowMutatingDeleteActions_AlsoThrow(string clause, string expected)
+    {
+        // SET NULL / SET DEFAULT mutate child rows on the same implicit DELETE and are captured
+        // just as little — same divergence, so the same refusal.
+        using var db = Create();
+        await CreateOrders(db);
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TABLE order_lines (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, order_id INTEGER DEFAULT 0 " +
+            $"REFERENCES orders(id) {clause})");
+
+        var ex = Assert.Throws<LocalDbRegistrationException>(() => db.RegisterReplicated("orders"));
+        Assert.Contains(expected, ex.Message);
+    }
+
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Register_NonCascadingFkParent_IsAllowed()
+    {
+        // The default (NO ACTION / RESTRICT) mutates no child row: the implicit DELETE simply
+        // fails the statement, which the applier already surfaces as a dead-lettered entry. Noisy,
+        // not silent — so there is nothing to refuse.
+        using var db = Create();
+        await CreateOrders(db);
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TABLE order_lines (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, order_id INTEGER REFERENCES orders(id))");
+        await db.ExecuteAsync("CREATE TABLE restricted (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, " +
+            "order_id INTEGER REFERENCES orders(id) ON DELETE RESTRICT)");
+
+        db.RegisterReplicated("orders");
+
+        Assert.Equal(3, (await Triggers(db)).Count);
+    }
+
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task Register_UnrelatedTablesWithCascades_DoNotBlockRegistration()
+    {
+        // The scan must key on the table being registered, not on "the database contains a cascade".
+        using var db = Create();
+        await CreateOrders(db);
+        await db.ExecuteAsync("CREATE TABLE widgets (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, name TEXT)");
+        await db.ExecuteAsync(
+            "CREATE TABLE widget_parts (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, widget_id INTEGER " +
+            "REFERENCES widgets(id) ON DELETE CASCADE)");
+
+        db.RegisterReplicated("orders");
+
+        Assert.True(db.ReplicatedTables.ContainsKey("orders"));
+    }
+
     [Fact]
     public async Task Register_IsIdempotent_RegeneratesTriggers()
     {