Aglet

Prioritize batch resume defects by duplicate and omission risk

Resume behavior deserves priority based on what a repeated or skipped item can change. A replayable read is different from a duplicate charge or notification, while an omitted record may quietly leave a batch incomplete. Compare those consequences with the reliability of the checkpoint evidence before setting the queue order.

Decide where the work belongs

  1. Separate replay from omission

    For each report, identify whether an item ran twice, never ran, or simply appeared twice in a log. Confirm the item’s durable effect and expected order. Put omissions and non-idempotent replays ahead of harmless duplicate observation when the evidence supports it.

  2. Assess snapshot stability

    Compare batches that resume against a fixed input snapshot with batches whose query can change between runs. Record whether new or removed records explain the sequence. A checkpoint bug should not inherit urgency from an input contract that is itself undefined.

  3. Choose a bounded recovery decision

    Select immediate investigation, a safe replay plan, or evidence collection. State which item identities must be reconciled before rerun and what checkpoint trace is missing. Avoid resetting a cursor as a first response when it could create more effects or omissions.

What to carry forward

Queue the issue with confirmed replay or omission evidence, side-effect consequence, input-snapshot confidence, and the smallest safe recovery action. Escalate when records can be skipped or effects can repeat without reconciliation. Otherwise schedule a checkpoint investigation with a fixed ordered fixture.

Technical background: Rails guides.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow