FA-620 / Replication / Member archive

Persist a replication resume checkpoint: A resume point splits a source transaction · case 05

The replication checkpoint operation is admitted even though a resume point splits a source transaction.

Member previewVariant 5 · 3 implementations · 9 checks per implementation

Case contract

Return a Boolean admission decision for persist a replication resume checkpoint. The record r must satisfy all of: all(x in r['contiguous_applied'][1] for x in range(r['contiguous_applied'][0]+1)); r['source_incarnation'][0] == r['source_incarnation'][1]; r['durable_destination'][0] <= r['durable_destination'][1]; r['transaction_boundary'][0] in r['transaction_boundary'][1]; r['checkpoint_monotonic'][0] >= r['checkpoint_monotonic'][1]. Extra tracing fields are ignored; validation does not mutate the record.

Why this case matters

A deterministic local contract for replication. Each negative fixture violates exactly one invariant. No transport timing, persistence, cryptographic verification, or full protocol implementation is claimed.

One recorded failure

Sample boundary fixture

This sample comes from the broken implementation of a controlled reproducer.

Boundary fixture	Actual	Expected	Outcome
A resume point splits a source transaction	`true`	`false`	Failed

MEMBER ARCHIVE

The complete case is available to members.

This record includes three runnable implementations, regression fixtures, execution results, and source hashes.

Member access is invitation-based. Sign in with your invited account to inspect the sources.