feat(result): persist PostgreSQL immutable snapshots by seonghobae · Pull Request #51 · ContextualWisdomLab/psychometrics-commons

seonghobae · 2026-08-13T12:06:27Z

Why

Open PRs #43–#50 remain merge-blocked on queued org workflows and missing independent review. ROADMAP Continuous rank 1 is the unfinished participant journey; result persistence is the next independent buyer-gap after in-flight instrument (#50), item-delivery (#48), consent (#49), session-bind (#47), data-rights (#46), and digest (#44/#43) slices.

What

migrations/0007_result_snapshot.sql for immutable result_snapshot and result_snapshot_observation
src/postgres_result_snapshot.rs persists a domain ResultSnapshot under READ COMMITTED
Exact replay, fail-closed identity/observation rebinding, supersession without predecessor mutation
TRACEABILITY/ERD/AS_BUILT/CHANGELOG updated. HTTP result transport stays Target.

Does not overlap #43/#44/#46/#47/#48/#49/#50. Does not recreate fast-mlsirm kernels.

Test plan

TEST_DATABASE_URL persistence + schema + error-contract tests
cargo clippy --all-targets -- -Dwarnings
cargo fmt --all -- --check
Exact-head required Checks after open

coderabbitai · 2026-08-13T12:06:38Z

Warning

Review limit reached

@seonghobae, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 55 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: eb8afe20-d957-4c4a-aae8-f55b30f2bbee

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cc5850a and c2ecc8b.

📒 Files selected for processing (7)

migrations/0007_result_snapshot.sql
src/lib.rs
src/postgres_result_snapshot.rs
tests/postgres_result_snapshot_error_contract.rs
tests/postgres_result_snapshot_immutability.rs
tests/postgres_result_snapshot_persistence.rs
tests/postgres_result_snapshot_schema_constraints.rs

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

Store one copied result-snapshot identity plus construct-level observations under READ COMMITTED, with exact replay and fail-closed identity rebinding. Psychometric values stay referenced, not recomputed.

CI line coverage failed at 3756/3757 because replay only hid the header SELECT error. Drop the observation relation after insert so persist_result_snapshot reaches the observation SELECT question-mark.

Fold landed consent-ownership authorization into Implemented and keep **Active PR** #51 as the named result-snapshot persistence slice, not protected-main truth.

# Conflicts: # CHANGELOG.md # docs/TRACEABILITY.md

Treat landed PostgreSQL readiness as Implemented and keep #51 as the Active persist slice.

Treat landed migration rollback coverage as Implemented and keep #51 as the Active persist slice.

Carry only the result-snapshot migration, adapter, and PostgreSQL contracts across the current protected-main tree. Preserve protected-main documentation and newer persistence modules while adding the result persistence module.

seonghobae · 2026-08-14T08:39:11Z

@opencode-agent

Please perform a bounded independent current-head review of 494dbc5d8d4dffbf58b9805161f12b8c25e243d9 against main and the repository's current ruleset. Do not update the branch or merge.

seonghobae · 2026-08-14T08:54:48Z

@opencode-agent

Please perform a bounded independent current-head review of 494dbc5d8d4dffbf58b9805161f12b8c25e243d9 against protected main cc5850a0d1eacbbf16d03075534fce460a8286e6 and the repository's current ruleset. Do not update the branch or merge.

seonghobae · 2026-08-14T13:11:02Z

@opencode-agent

Please perform a bounded independent current-head review of 665d93de9ec608416b1f46076f4208fb5bd29b49 against protected main cc5850a0d1eacbbf16d03075534fce460a8286e6. Exact-head Runtime CI, Security Scan, SAST Semgrep, coverage-evidence, and the required OpenCode workflow check are successful. Do not update the branch or merge.

opencode-agent

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 665d93de9ec608416b1f46076f4208fb5bd29b49.
Head SHA: 665d93de9ec608416b1f46076f4208fb5bd29b49
Workflow run: 31817234092
Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Result: FAIL
Test evidence: not proven passing
Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test (3 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (3 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]

opencode-agent · 2026-08-14T16:41:18Z

OpenCode Review Overview

Head SHA: c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098
Workflow run: 31897761305
Workflow attempt: 1
Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098.
Head SHA: c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098
Workflow run: 31897761305
Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Result: FAIL
Test evidence: not proven passing
Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test (4 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]

opencode-agent

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 47d724868ef99061c96d6b4e2f5c857de391b212.
Head SHA: 47d724868ef99061c96d6b4e2f5c857de391b212
Workflow run: 31856097966
Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Result: FAIL
Test evidence: not proven passing
Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test (4 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]

opencode-agent

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098.
Head SHA: c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098
Workflow run: 31894350529
Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Result: FAIL
Test evidence: not proven passing
Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test (4 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]

opencode-agent

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098.
Head SHA: c2ecc8b4ebcf42ba55bf6f6b4f7174d7d39bf098
Workflow run: 31897761305
Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Result: FAIL
Test evidence: not proven passing
Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (3 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (3 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test (4 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]

Superseded by later same-head evidence: coverage-evidence and opencode-review completed successfully for unchanged head c2ecc8b. This REQUEST_CHANGES contains only the now-false coverage-evidence failure and no surviving source finding.

Keep the response-event ledger adapter beside item-delivery and result snapshot modules now on protected main.

Keep the evaluated baseline at 62524a3 for #48/#51 persist evidence. Discard the stale Active PR claim that merged #76 is still open work. Co-authored-by: Seongho Bae <seonghobae@users.noreply.github.com>

seonghobae added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2026

docs: name result-snapshot persistence Active PR #51

18a1589

This was referenced Aug 13, 2026

feat(response): persist PostgreSQL immutable completed snapshots #55

Merged

feat(scoring): persist PostgreSQL version-pinned request identity #56

Merged

seonghobae added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2026

docs: name result-snapshot persistence Active PR #51

6f0a5d7

seonghobae force-pushed the feat/result-snapshot-persistence-20260813 branch 2 times, most recently from 790eae3 to a61ce8c Compare August 13, 2026 17:55

seonghobae added 2 commits August 14, 2026 04:55

feat(result): persist PostgreSQL immutable snapshots

062799b

Store one copied result-snapshot identity plus construct-level observations under READ COMMITTED, with exact replay and fail-closed identity rebinding. Psychometric values stay referenced, not recomputed.

test(result): cover observation replay-select persistence failure

65dc31a

CI line coverage failed at 3756/3757 because replay only hid the header SELECT error. Drop the observation relation after insert so persist_result_snapshot reaches the observation SELECT question-mark.

seonghobae force-pushed the feat/result-snapshot-persistence-20260813 branch from a61ce8c to 65dc31a Compare August 13, 2026 19:55

seonghobae added 10 commits August 14, 2026 07:57

merge(main): reconcile result-snapshot persistence after #59

a369ebf

Fold landed consent-ownership authorization into Implemented and keep **Active PR** #51 as the named result-snapshot persistence slice, not protected-main truth.

merge(main): reconcile persist PR #51 after #47

dfd3a5a

# Conflicts: # CHANGELOG.md # docs/TRACEABILITY.md

docs(traceability): name persist work as Active PR #51 after #47

2638b63

docs(traceability): restore Active PR #51 after #47 rebase

18ff5a6

merge(main): reconcile result persist after #58

5a803fa

merge(main): reconcile result persist after #64

a5baef4

merge(main): reconcile persist PR #51 after #62

43f5bfd

Treat landed PostgreSQL readiness as Implemented and keep #51 as the Active persist slice.

merge(main): reconcile persist PR #51 after #63

e00c864

Treat landed migration rollback coverage as Implemented and keep #51 as the Active persist slice.

test(result): clean fault-injection database objects

528ae77

seonghobae added 2 commits August 14, 2026 19:55

style(result): restore rustfmt module ordering

9184a7c

style(result): preserve rustfmt trailing newline

665d93d

opencode-agent Bot requested changes Aug 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

seonghobae added 2 commits August 15, 2026 08:56

test(result): require database immutability for result evidence

e17186e

fix(result): enforce immutable snapshots in PostgreSQL

47d7248

opencode-agent Bot requested changes Aug 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

seonghobae added 2 commits August 15, 2026 18:57

test(result): reject invalid durable scientific provenance

6ca7d88

fix(result): enforce durable scoring provenance bounds

c2ecc8b

opencode-agent Bot previously requested changes Aug 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

seonghobae merged commit 62524a3 into main Aug 16, 2026
30 checks passed

seonghobae mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2026

docs(traceability): record item-delivery and result snapshot persist on main #96

Closed

seonghobae added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2026

merge(main): reconcile persist PR #53 after #48, #51, and #79

dd62600

Keep the response-event ledger adapter beside item-delivery and result snapshot modules now on protected main.

seonghobae mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2026

docs: rebaseline persistence and traceability on current protected main #80

Closed

cursor Bot mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2026

feat(session): persist created sessions and rebaseline shipped truth #100

Closed

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

feat(result): persist PostgreSQL immutable snapshots - #51

feat(result): persist PostgreSQL immutable snapshots#51
seonghobae merged 18 commits into
mainfrom
feat/result-snapshot-persistence-20260813

seonghobae commented Aug 13, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Review limit reached

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

Uh oh!

Conversation

seonghobae commented Aug 13, 2026

Why

What

Test plan

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Review limit reached

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

seonghobae commented Aug 14, 2026

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Changed-File Evidence Map

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

OpenCode Review Overview

Pull request overview

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Changed-File Evidence Map

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Changed-File Evidence Map

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Changed-File Evidence Map

Uh oh!

opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

Changed-File Evidence Map

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading