fix: keep the accounting path degrading after the wrapper change
Letting SourceNotConfiguredError through the gate wrappers opened a hole the recheck caught: _record_quietly only degrades GovernanceBackendError, so an assembly defect raised from the accounting side would now escape and destroy a response from a call that had already genuinely succeeded. That inverts the exact invariant _record_quietly exists to hold. Widening _record_quietly is the right fix rather than narrowing the wrappers, because that layer degrades by what the path is (accounting, the call is already done) rather than by which error type shows up. Narrowing would have left 4 of 9 wrapper methods as exceptions to a rule nobody can remember. No backend raises it from an accounting method today, so this is a guardrail for whoever adds source-name validation to a breaker backend. The stub that first reported this green was wrong: its record_success lacked count_attempt, so it raised TypeError and the wrapper relabeled it. Fixed signature, then the test failed as it should have. Also finishes the three-to-five leak path correction across the four remaining spots, including the wiki summary card that indexes this design.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ Issue 建议取 0。**否决**:下游 `schedule_retry(after_s=0)` 会立刻重
|
||||
| 测试 | 位置 | 先失败后通过的证据 |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `GovernanceBackendError` 可被 `except GatewayUnavailableError` 接住 | `tests/unit/test_errors.py` | 改前 `pytest.raises(GatewayUnavailableError)` 必失败 |
|
||||
| 三条泄漏路径(`try_acquire`/`try_enter`/`progress_age_s`)抛出的异常携带正确 `scope` 与非零 `retry_after_s` | `tests/unit/test_backpressure.py` — **三条桩都需新增**(Codex 审计划时核出: `:176-186` 是记账侧 `record_success`/`record_failure`/`mark_progress` 的降级桩,不是闸门路径;`progress_age_s` 仅 `:243-257` 覆盖包装行为、不验 scope) | 改前无 `scope` 属性,`AttributeError` |
|
||||
| 闸门泄漏路径(五条,§1.1)抛出的异常携带正确 `scope` 与非零 `retry_after_s`;钉住 `try_acquire`/`try_enter`/`progress_age_s` 三条代表路径,余两条由同一注入机制覆盖 | `tests/unit/test_backpressure.py` — **三条桩都需新增**(Codex 审计划时核出: `:176-186` 是记账侧 `record_success`/`record_failure`/`mark_progress` 的降级桩,不是闸门路径;`progress_age_s` 仅 `:243-257` 覆盖包装行为、不验 scope) | 改前无 `scope` 属性,`AttributeError` |
|
||||
| `str(exc)` 仍为原诊断串 | `tests/unit/test_errors.py` | 防 §3.5 回归 |
|
||||
| 未知源抛 `SourceNotConfiguredError` 且**不是** `GatewayUnavailableError` | 改 `tests/unit/test_redis_key_layout.py:70-74`;内存版**当前无覆盖,需新增** | 改前抛 `GovernanceBackendError`,断言"不是 scope 级"必失败 |
|
||||
| Redis 真实掉线时准入侧行为 | `tests/integration/test_redis_cross_connection.py:228-245`(真实 Redis,不 mock) | 断言由 `GovernanceBackendError` 收紧为"是 `GatewayUnavailableError` 且 `reason == governance_backend_down`" |
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ date: 2026-08-06
|
||||
|
||||
## 对 issue 前提的四处修正
|
||||
|
||||
泄漏路径是**三条**不是两条(`retry.py:216` 的 `progress_age_s()` 同样在 catch 之外);构造点 **22 处**;其中 2 处语义完全不同(未知源);`retry_after_s=0` 语义通但工程不通。
|
||||
泄漏路径是**五条**不是两条(判据: 该 gate 调用点是否被 `_record_quietly` 包裹——`QuotaGate` 的 try_acquire / stats / progress_age_s 与 `BreakerGate` 的 try_enter / retry_after_s 均未包裹,直达调用方);构造点 **22 处**;其中 2 处语义完全不同(未知源);`retry_after_s=0` 语义通但工程不通。
|
||||
|
||||
根因记录: `ARCHITECTURE.md` §6.1 错误分类表里 `GovernanceBackendError` **一次都没出现**——它是 M2 引入分布式后端时新增的,当时未回补架构表,于是它在"调用方视角的分类学"中从来没有位置,README 的遗漏是这个遗漏的下游后果。
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ class BreakerGate:
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `GovernanceBackendError` 可被 `except GatewayUnavailableError` 接住,且 `reason == "governance_backend_down"`、`retry_after_s == 5.0` | `tests/unit/test_errors.py` | 改前非其子类,`pytest.raises(GatewayUnavailableError)` 不匹配 |
|
||||
| `str(exc)` 仍为构造时的诊断串(防 §3.5 回归) | `tests/unit/test_errors.py` | 改前无该风险但改后若漏写 `self.args` 即失败,是回归护栏 |
|
||||
| 三条泄漏路径(`try_acquire` / `try_enter` / `progress_age_s`)抛出的异常带正确 `scope`、且可被 `except GatewayUnavailableError` 接住 | `tests/unit/test_backpressure.py` — **三条都要新增桩**。现状: `progress_age_s` 只有 `TestQuotaGateProgressAge`(`:243-257`)覆盖包装行为、不验 scope;`try_acquire`(`QuotaGate`)与 `try_enter`(`BreakerGate`)**完全无桩** | 改前异常无 `scope` 属性 → `AttributeError`;两条新路径改前无覆盖 |
|
||||
| 闸门泄漏路径(共五条,见设计 §1.1)抛出的异常带正确 `scope`、且可被 `except GatewayUnavailableError` 接住;钉住 `try_acquire` / `try_enter` / `progress_age_s` 三条代表路径 | `tests/unit/test_backpressure.py` — **三条都要新增桩**。现状: `progress_age_s` 只有 `TestQuotaGateProgressAge`(`:243-257`)覆盖包装行为、不验 scope;`try_acquire`(`QuotaGate`)与 `try_enter`(`BreakerGate`)**完全无桩** | 改前异常无 `scope` 属性 → `AttributeError`;两条新路径改前无覆盖 |
|
||||
| 未知源抛 `SourceNotConfiguredError`,且断言它**不是** `GatewayUnavailableError` | 改 `tests/unit/test_redis_key_layout.py:70-74`(`test_unknown_source_rejected`,现断言 `GovernanceBackendError`);内存版**当前无对应用例,需新增**一条同款(`backends/memory/limiter.py:92` 的 `_cfg("nope")`) | 改前 redis 版类型断言失败;内存版改前无覆盖(该分支从未被测过) |
|
||||
| Redis 真实掉线时准入侧抛 scope 级异常且 `reason == "governance_backend_down"` | `tests/integration/test_redis_cross_connection.py:228-245`(真实 Redis,不 mock) | 改前无 `reason` 属性 |
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -34,4 +34,12 @@ date: 2026-08-06
|
||||
|
||||
Codex 同时独立核实了计划的可执行性锚点: 22 处构造点、三处 gate 装配、后端层 `self._scope` 位置、README/ARCH 章节行号,均与 `src/` 现状相符。
|
||||
|
||||
## 独立验证炸出的阻塞缺陷(2026-08-06,全新上下文 verifier)
|
||||
|
||||
T1–T5 全绿、四道门禁全过之后,verifier 用一个**走 `QuotaGate` 的**端到端用例证明: 装配缺陷在唯一的生产路径上根本没拆出去——包装器的 `except GovernanceBackendError: raise` 只放行旧类型,`SourceNotConfiguredError` 落进下一行 `except Exception` 被重新包回去,配置写错照样永远重投。**盲区在于 T3 写的两条用例都直接打私有 `_cfg()`,比生产路径低一层。**
|
||||
|
||||
修复见正文 §T6(9 处放行 + 遥测终态捕获 + 走包装器的回归测试)。复核时 verifier 又指出一颗雷: 新放行让该异常能穿透 `_record_quietly`,而那层降级的存在理由是"调用已真实完成,写回失败不该丢弃成功响应"——同批把三处 `_record_quietly` 一并放宽并加了回归断言。
|
||||
|
||||
两轮都订正了同一处事实错误: 闸门泄漏路径是**五条**不是三条(`QuotaGate.stats` 与 `BreakerGate.retry_after_s` 同样未被 `_record_quietly` 包裹)。
|
||||
|
||||
相关: [[governance-backend-error]](design)、[[m2-distributed]]
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user