joule-moq-relay, co-performance §7.3: count each author's audience inputs in its chain's order #462

Merged

dcharlot merged 3 commits from fix/floor-input-chain-order into main 2026-10-25 05:18:18 -04:00

Conversation 0 Commits 3 Files changed 10 +601 -78

2026-10-25

Transaction Science

wai.live.coperformance §7.3: a relay counts an author's inputs in its chain's order ...

The relay MUST count an author's inputs in the order of the author's chain (live-events
§6.2), as a verifier does, never in the order they reach it: one chain's records can reach it
on several streams, one for each group. It decides an input once it has received every record
of the chain below it and decided every input among them; it holds an input that arrives
ahead of a gap for a bound of its own, refuses one whose gap has not filled by then as
input_out_of_order and counts the chain from the record after it; and it refuses as
input_out_of_order an input that arrives after a later input of its author was forwarded.

The reason is the relay's alone, as window_committed is (§8, now naming both): a verifier
holds each chain in order and counts each input where §9.2 step 4 meets it, so §10, the
corpus, wai-rs and co_performance_verify.py are unchanged. §12 notes that an author leaving a
gap in its own chain holds up only its own inputs, for no longer than the bound. CHANGELOG.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

6b65ab5ffb

• View at this point in history

2026-10-25 04:08:59 -04:00

Transaction Science

relay floor test: the payload check is the one an arrival-order relay fails first ...

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

0517a563c9

• View at this point in history

2026-10-25 03:56:05 -04:00

Transaction Science

joule-moq-relay: count each author's audience inputs in its chain's order, not in arrival order ...

Each group of a member's events track rides a stream of its own, and the relay reads each
stream in a task of its own, so two inputs sent back to back reached the floor in either
order. The floor counted them as they came: with a limit of one, it could forward a member's
second input (seq 1) and refuse its first (seq 0), leaving subscribers with seq 1 and a gap at
seq 0, the opposite of what a verifier counting in chain order decides.

The floor now keeps each author's chain as it has received it (the first seq it lacks, the
seqs above it, and the inputs waiting) and decides an input once it holds every record of the
chain below it and no input below it waits. Floor::events_filter is async: an input ahead of a
gap waits, with the rest of its stream, until the gap fills or the floor's hold runs out
([floor] hold_ms, 2 000 by default). One whose hold runs out is refused input_out_of_order,
whichever object of its author's finds it so, and the chain is counted from the record after
it. An input that arrives after a later input of its author was forwarded is refused
input_out_of_order too. Floor::events_step is the synchronous step, tested with explicit
instants; Floor::waiting counts the inputs held.

Tests: tests/floor.rs sends a member's seq 1 first, waits until the relay holds it, then
sends seq 0: seq 0 forwarded, seq 1 refused input_over_limit; and seq 1 alone, refused
input_out_of_order no sooner than the hold, after which a late seq 0 is forwarded. Unit tests
cover a chat between two votes, an object whose records are out of seq order, the chain
counted from after a refused input, and an input whose stream is gone. The hardened test
from Train D is kept; its config gains `..FloorConfig::default()`.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

7a188614b1

• View at this point in history

2026-10-25 03:56:05 -04:00