The exclusive-ownership rule turned on whether every reader of the mesh registry
could be served another way. Eighteen consumers open a direct connection. Four
groups, and only one is work.
The owner and its machinery keep reading, because they own it. The node appliers
are already resolved — ADR 0037 stops the host querying the mesh database,
decided for tier reasons with nothing to do with this.
The bulk are FOREIGN TENANTS. The work engine holds ten of its own tables in the
registry's database, the knowledge base two, pipeline logs one. Thirteen foreign
tables across three contexts, which is how-we-build §4's shared schema counted.
So the question was the wrong shape: the problem is not readers needing a new
route to data, it is tenants needing to move out. Tasks, agents and teams have
nothing to do with nodes and modules and are co-located by history. Give that
context its own database and its dependency on the registry shrinks to one
table.
A handful of genuine cross-context reads remain, small enough to enumerate
rather than estimate. The rule holds.
Left open: whether those reads want an interface or events. Asking which nodes
exist at the moment you need to know is a request; reacting when a node appears
is a subscription, and some consumers want both.
jschoubben
afcc355744