Files
stack/docs/scratchpads/1000-rm-61-ci-contract-exemption.md
T
2026-08-01 08:20:30 -05:00

57 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# RM-61 — CI contract exemption for #1000 teardown artifact
**Tracking:** RM-61 / issue #1000
**Branch:** `fix/rm-61-ci-contract-exemption`
**Owner:** `coder-mos1`
## Objective
Determine, by red-first provider controls, whether the `ci-postgres` pod-not-found teardown signature discriminates from a real PostgreSQL failure. Only if it discriminates may a named, bounded CI-contract exemption be implemented. The exemption must retire when #1000 is fixed; fixing #1000 is the closure path.
## Pre-registered kill criterion
If an injected real `ci-postgres` failure also yields `pods "wp-svc-<ULID>-ci-postgres" not found` as the service's provider-visible failure, the signature does not discriminate. Option B is unsafe; stop exemption implementation and fall to Option A (#1000).
## Plan
1. Capture full `-f json` records for the 11 supplied observations and state counts.
2. Run one startup-failure control using the real pgvector/PostgreSQL image with an invalid `initdb` argument.
3. Run one post-readiness crash control using real PostgreSQL, `pg_isready`, and a deliberate postmaster kill while a DB-dependent probe is active.
4. Compare the raw `ci-postgres` service record independently of failures in dependent steps.
5. Investigate runner/time/head clustering only as a hypothesis; never encode incidental correlates or retries into policy.
6. If and only if the controls discriminate, implement and test the exact exemption, document its two-way boundary, and track retirement at #1000.
## Budget
No explicit token cap supplied. Working estimate: 20K30K tokens. Limit provider controls to the two pre-registered runs; no retries or re-roll policy.
## Initial evidence
Historical JSON saved locally under `.evidence/rm-61/` (not for commit). Supplied pipelines: 11 total. Child-step counts: five pipelines with 9 children and six with 10 children. Seven contain the `ci-postgres` pod-not-found failure (#2170, #2175, #2180, #2181, #2182, #2187, #2188); four do not (#2158, #2167, #2184, #2186). Every observed workflow reports `agent_id=44`, so the available JSON does not separate clean and artifact runs by runner. This refutes runner identity as a discriminator in the sampled record.
## Progress
- [x] Requirements and kill criterion recorded before control implementation.
- [x] Historical full-JSON records captured.
- [x] Startup-failure control observed terminal.
- [ ] Post-readiness crash control observed terminal.
- [ ] Discrimination verdict recorded.
- [ ] Conditional exemption implementation (only if verdict permits).
## Tests / evidence
### Control 1 — real startup failure
- Commit: `3931b0e29eb834914f7b17e4db7e221481d436fa`
- Pipeline: #2189, exact commit match.
- Full JSON child scan: 9 total — 7 success, 2 failure, 0 skipped/pending/running.
- `ci-postgres`: `state=failure`, `exit_code=1`, `error=null`, with a five-second execution window.
- `test`: `state=failure`, `exit_code=1` after the readiness budget expired.
- Pipeline/workflow: terminal `failure`.
This control is red and its service record differs from #1000 (`exit_code=0` plus pod-not-found). It proves the startup-failure direction only. It does not settle the dangerous post-readiness crash/garbage-collection path.
## Risks
The Woodpecker Kubernetes backend may garbage-collect both genuinely failed and successfully used service pods before reconciliation. If so, the provider-visible service signature cannot safely support Option B.