Files
hq/04-ISSUES/194-the-hosts-own-former-archive-stops-every-apply/00-report.md
T
jschoubben 780c2b6e58 Issue 194: the host's own former archive stops every machine applying anything
Rule 5 of ADR 0163 (a former target is removed) met issue 162 (an archive
has no removal) in the host's own archive, the first time a host carrying
former targets replaced itself; every machine applied nothing from then on.
2026-10-02 02:42:19 +02:00

65 lines
3.7 KiB
Markdown

---
status: located
opened: 2026-10-02
located-in: [mesh-host internal/apply (removeOrphan: a former target of a kind with no removal was fatal), mesh-host internal/store (Record keeps a former target for every kind, the host's own archive included)]
fixed-by:
amended-design:
---
# 194 — The host's own former archive stops every machine applying anything
## What was observed
2026-10-02, 00:34Z, on all four machines of this mesh, the first time a host carrying former
targets ([ADR 0163](../../02-DECISIONS/0163-taking-a-module-over-is-a-comparison.md), rule 5,
built in mesh-host 63) replaced itself with a newer host (mesh-host 64).
The host delivers its own successor as an archive whose target is a versioned directory
([ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md)): every new version
is the same resource with a new target. Since mesh-host 63 the record keeps a resource's former
target so the next apply removes what the host wrote under it
([issue 097](../097-a-resource-that-changes-target-leaves-the-old-one-behind/00-report.md)). So
the new host's first apply found the previous version's directory as a former target of its own
archive, and asked the removal for an archive — which does not exist
([issue 162](../162-an-archive-cannot-be-undeclared/00-report.md)):
```
applying "mesh-host.next@former:/usr/lib/nox-mesh-host/versions/3c906749ad27": no way to remove a "archive"
0 resource(s) were applied and remain
```
Orphans are removed before any resource is applied on a converged machine, so the refusal ended
every apply at its first step. Every machine reported `failed`, applied nothing, and would have
gone on doing so: a host fix is itself an archive the same apply would have to write, and the apply
never reached it. The machines kept running what they had; nothing new from the mesh could land.
## Why it matters beyond this instance
Two rules that are each right met in the one resource the host cannot afford to stop on. Rule 5
says a former target is removed and said; issue 162 says an archive has no removal, deliberately,
so an unassignment nothing can undo is never reported as done. Neither rule was wrong; their
meeting was never tested, because the bed that would have found it is a host replacing itself
under the new rule, and the first such replacement was the live one. The fix is narrow: a former
target of a kind the host cannot remove is left in place, said, and forgotten — never fatal,
because nobody dropped it. An archive the declaration dropped still refuses, as 162 has it.
## What it took to recover
The broken host cannot apply its own fix: the fix is delivered as an archive, and the apply fails
before writing anything. On each machine the host's record (`/var/lib/mesh-host/state.json`) had to
lose the one `@former:` entry by hand, once, so that the next push could write the fixed archive and
stand aside for it. A manual edit of the host's record is otherwise never done; it is written here
because the alternative was four machines that could apply nothing.
## Open questions
- Should `Record` keep a former target for a kind the host cannot remove at all? The trace is
useful; the removal it implies is not. Keeping it and letting the apply forget it is what the fix
does; not recording it would be quieter.
- Should the host's own versions directory be cleaned by the launcher rather than by the apply —
the one archive whose former targets are genuinely removable, by the thing that knows which one
runs?
- Is there a bed that replaces a host under the current rules before the live mesh does
(the proof row of [ADR 0141](../../02-DECISIONS/0141-the-host-delivers-its-own-successor.md) was
a single crossover, before former targets existed)?