Exact

Exact Union RegExp

Repository files (latest commit first)

Filename	Latest commit message	Latest commit date
Transaction Science e5056334af pool/1: reclaim idle capacity without reclaiming on a missing number (SPEC §2.7) ... A workload holding accelerators while consuming almost no energy is holding capacity it is not using. A device ledger cannot see that — a held device is a held device, saturated or parked at a prompt — so idle reclamation is a question only an energy-denominated scheduler can ask. It is also the most dangerous question in this standard, because the obvious implementation destroys running work. "This workload spent 0 µJ" arrives identically from a parked workload and from a meter that is not there: meter unavailable → 0 µJ → "idle" → reclaim → running work destroyed That is this family's "unknown conflated with a value" defect in its most destructive form, so the module is built around refusing it: - **Unknown is not idle.** An `Estimator` figure cannot establish idleness whatever its value, and the grade is tested **before** the value meets any threshold — so no threshold setting lets a guess through, including one high enough to catch everything. A workload is reclaimed on evidence that it is idle, never on the absence of evidence that it is busy. - **Idleness is a rate over a stated window, never an instant.** Any workload is momentarily between steps. An observation shorter than the policy's window yields no verdict: startup is not idleness. An empty window yields no rate — `mean_uw()` returns `None`, not zero, because zero is the one value that reads as idle. - **Nothing held, nothing to reclaim.** - **Four verdicts, and only one permits reclamation.** A workload with no verdict is *absent* from `reclamation_order`, not ranked last in it: it is not a worse candidate than an idle workload, it is not a candidate. Check order is normative: nothing held, then the window, then the grade, then the rate. A later check never rescues an earlier refusal. `IdlePolicy::default()` reclaims **nothing**. A threshold must sit above the hardware's idle draw or nothing is ever idle, and below its working draw or everything is, and both are properties of the device rather than of this standard — so §2.7 declines to guess and makes the unconfigured failure "nobody reclaimed" rather than "everybody reclaimed". This is not preemption. §5.2 ranks who is spending badly under contention; this asks who is not spending at all. A workload burning energy while completing nothing is thrashing, not idle, and §5.2 is what catches it. Conformance gains §7.25–28. Also fixes three broken intra-doc links left by earlier slices (`WitnessReceipt`, the `derive` function/attribute ambiguity, and a public doc linking the private first pass), so `cargo doc` is clean. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>		2026-10-18 19:25:23 -04:00
..
pool-core	pool/1: reclaim idle capacity without reclaiming on a missing number (SPEC §2.7)	2026-10-18 19:25:23 -04:00