---
status: draft
last_updated: 2026-10-05
---

# alkstore — Open Questions

Centralized tracker. IDs `OQ-NN` are stable — never renumber; append.
The Phase 0 register's questions (`OQ-ST-01..08` in
`docs/research/phase-0.md`) are promoted here faithfully: **OQ-01..08
mirror OQ-ST-01..08 one-to-one**, keeping their Phase 0 statuses
(a resolved register question stays listed here as resolved, with the
ADR that carries its decision). New Phase 1 questions append from
OQ-09. Resolution order so far: **OQ-04 resolved** (2026-10-05,
[ADR-008](decisions/008-contract-v1-pinning.md) — the contract surface
everything else hangs off). Next: OQ-05/OQ-09 (the queue semantics
track; OQ-09 also owns the scheduler guarantee row), OQ-06
(the SQLite dependency gate), OQ-08 (rides the now-pinned trait
shape), OQ-10 (versioning discipline for contract extensions).

Resolved questions stay listed with their resolution; they are not
deleted.

## Theme: Scope

### OQ-01: Scope boundary — which honker features are in-scope? *(== OQ-ST-01)*

- **Origin**: [consumer-inventory.md](../research/consumer-inventory.md),
  [ADR-002](decisions/002-feature-scope.md)
- **Status**: resolved (2026-10-04, Phase 0)
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Answered by the consumer inventory — scope votes
  shrink to named rows, not the whole honker feature list. First-class:
  notify/listen (pinned), streams (operator-authority record). In
  scope: named locks, queues + outbox (documented), scheduler
  (documented-thin). Cut-flags: rate limits, result storage. Out:
  honker's exclusion lines. Decision recorded in
  [ADR-002](decisions/002-feature-scope.md).
- **Cross-references**: OQ-07, OQ-04.

### OQ-02: Crate scope — one store crate, or reactive-core + engines? *(== OQ-ST-02)*

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md)
- **Status**: resolved (2026-10-04, operator decision; Phase 0)
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Reactive-core crate + per-engine engine crates; the
  split isolates the engines' asymmetry of work and keeps engine
  binaries single-driver (which the libsqlite3-sys collision
  effectively requires). Decision recorded in
  [ADR-001](decisions/001-crate-split.md) — including the reasoning
  that superseded the inventory's single-crate lean.
- **Cross-references**: OQ-03, OQ-10.

### OQ-03: Driver story — sqlx, tokio-postgres, or per-engine drivers? *(== OQ-ST-03)*

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md)
- **Status**: resolved (2026-10-04, POC-backed both engines; Phase 0)
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Per-engine drivers — rusqlite + honker-core 0.5.0
  (SQLite; bridged seam), tokio-postgres 0.7.18 + deadpool-postgres
  0.14.2 (Postgres), under OQ-02's crate split. Decisions recorded in
  [ADR-003](decisions/003-sqlite-driver.md) and
  [ADR-004](decisions/004-postgres-driver.md); measurements in
  `docs/research/poc-sqlite-posture-findings.md` and
  `docs/research/poc-pg-posture-findings.md`.
- **Cross-references**: OQ-02, OQ-05, OQ-06.

### OQ-07: SQLite-side scope — loadable extension? *(== OQ-ST-07)*

- **Origin**: [ADR-002](decisions/002-feature-scope.md)
- **Status**: resolved (cut-only, 2026-10-04; Phase 0)
- **Priority**: low
- **Resolution**: The loadable-extension surface is out: every
  identified consumer is in-process Rust attaching to its own
  connection (the honker-core `attach_honker_functions` shape). Folded
  into OQ-01's scope resolution and [ADR-002](decisions/002-feature-scope.md)
  (explicitly, so the slot's disposition is visible — the Phase 0
  register carried it as its own entry).
- **Cross-references**: OQ-01.

## Theme: Core contract

### OQ-04: Contract pinning — the exact trait surface and its semantics *(== OQ-ST-04)* — **RESOLVED**

*(Retitled in promotion: OQ-ST-04's framing — "the reactive
abstraction — what does the unified notify surface look like?" —
narrowed to the pinning work its own record already scoped.)*

- **Origin**: [core-contract.md](core-contract.md),
  [ADR-006](decisions/006-wake-and-delivery-contract.md),
  [ADR-007](decisions/007-transactional-seam.md)
- **Status**: resolved (2026-10-05, Phase 1 — [ADR-008](decisions/008-contract-v1-pinning.md))
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: Pinned as contract v1 by
  [ADR-008](decisions/008-contract-v1-pinning.md): (1) the v1
  surface partition — notify/streams/queue-skeleton/locks/outbox/tx
  seam are contract; queue depth rides OQ-05, scheduler shape rides
  OQ-09, capabilities ride OQ-08, `claim_waker` stays engine-internal,
  cut-flag rows stay out. (2) `TxHandle`: the `*_tx` methods live on
  the handle trait — boxed `dyn` handle, no downcast, no enum (the
  enum would invert ADR-001's dependency direction); the POCs'
  `as_any_mut` friction dissolves by construction. (3) `listen()`
  returns a `WakeReceiver` delivering opaque `Wake { channel }` —
  honker's payload transport is not surfaced (uniformity with the
  opaque contract, ADR-006). (4) Reserved prefix `__alkstore_`, with
  `__alkstore_listener_reconnected__` as the one v1-reserved string
  (the POC's ad-hoc `__listener_reconnected__` renamed at
  implementation). (5) Error taxonomy: `PayloadTooLarge` /
  `ReservedName` / `InvalidName` / `Closed` / `Codec` / `Database`,
  pinned by the act-differently rule. (6) `Store::open` is engine-crate
  surface; the contract is the trait it returns. (7) Locks guarantee
  row added to ADR-006's table (TTL-bounded mutual exclusion, silent
  expiry); the scheduler row is explicitly transferred to OQ-09's
  resolution. A verification backlog (core-contract.md §Verification
  backlog) tracks the one-engine-pinned properties.
- **Cross-references**: OQ-01, OQ-10, OQ-09, OQ-08.

## Theme: Queues and scheduling

### OQ-05: Queue semantics depth — retry/backoff/dead-letter/sweep design *(== OQ-ST-05)*

- **Origin**: [queues.md](queues.md)
- **Status**: open (posture resolved: re-derived on both engines with
  the pg-boss schema family as design reference and honker's queue
  design as the SQLite-side one — ADR-004/ADR-005)
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: open. The transactional and claim properties (the
  hard driver-coupled part) are POC-pinned on both engines. Remaining:
  the semantics-depth design — retry policy shape (attempts, backoff
  curve), visibility-timeout/renewal mechanics, dead-letter
  move-vs-flag and retention, sweep/maintenance design
  (`sweep_expired` cadence and owner), and whether result-storage's
  cut-flag gets reconsidered as part of this surface (it is
  queue-adjacent tooling).
- **Cross-references**: OQ-09, OQ-06.

### OQ-09: Is the scheduler a first-class mechanism, or queues + `schedule()`?

- **Origin**: [queues.md](queues.md) (spin-out of OQ-05's Phase 0
  framing, where the scheduler's boundary question lived)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: open. The inventory found the scheduler need real but
  thin (the family-wide "who sweeps/renews/reaps" problem), and
  mechanically scheduler = cron/`@every` enqueueing into named queues
  + leader election + a tick. If design confirms the collapse, the
  contract surface is queues + `store.schedule(cron, queue)` with the
  scheduler mechanism absorbed; if consumers need
  inspectable/pausable schedule objects (`add/pause/resume/update/
  list/remove`), it stays a first-class mechanism (the full honker
  shape). Decided against the inventory rows, not the whole honker
  menu. **Also owns the delivery-guarantee table's scheduler row**
  (transferred by [ADR-008](decisions/008-contract-v1-pinning.md) §7:
  under collapse the scheduler inherits the queues row; otherwise a
  dedicated row is pinned with the surface decision). The scheduler
  surface is *not* part of contract v1 ([ADR-008](decisions/008-contract-v1-pinning.md) §1).
- **Cross-references**: OQ-05, OQ-04.

## Theme: Engines and dependencies

### OQ-06: honker-core quality read — does the default posture hold? *(== OQ-ST-06)*

- **Origin**: [ADR-005](decisions/005-dependency-ownership.md),
  [engine-sqlite.md](engine-sqlite.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: high (fork trigger is a gate on the SQLite engine's
  dependency posture)
- **Resolution**: open. ADR-005 fixed the calculus and the trigger: the
  Phase 1 quality read of honker-core 0.5's watcher/transactional core
  (Writer/Readers/SharedUpdateWatcher/attach_*) — looking for defects
  the POCs wouldn't surface, unsafe assumptions in the watcher
  failure-handling, and schema-migration brittleness. Outcomes: posture
  holds (no ADR change), or a fork/patch need is named (fork is normal
  work per ADR-005).
- **Cross-references**: ADR-003, ADR-005, OQ-05 (if the read forces a
  fork, queue-on-honker-machinery work changes shape).

## Theme: Deployment and capabilities

### OQ-08: Where does the honest single-host/multi-host boundary live in the trait surface? *(== OQ-ST-08)*

- **Origin**: [deployment.md](deployment.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: open. The pg engine is natively multi-host (POC #2
  verified — no single-host assumption to remove); SQLite is
  single-machine by nature (file-backed, NFS-two-writers unsupported —
  honker's honesty posture, inherited). The unified surface must not
  pretend SQLite is multi-host. Options: per-engine capability flags
  (`Store::capabilities()`), a documented deployment matrix only
  ([deployment.md](deployment.md) carries the facts), or compile-time
  knowledge only
  (a consumer choosing the SQLite engine knows). Rides OQ-04: the
  trait's shape constrains where capability differences can surface.
- **Cross-references**: OQ-04, [ADR-006](decisions/006-wake-and-delivery-contract.md).

### OQ-10: How do engine crates track core-contract version changes?

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md),
  [ADR-001](decisions/001-crate-split.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: open. The core crate's trait surface is a contract
  the engine crates must track ([ADR-001](decisions/001-crate-split.md) negative consequence). What
  is the versioning/sync discipline — semver-bump-only-when-
  contract-changes, engines pin core ranges, a contract-compatibility
  test suite the engines run against the core's trait definitions?
  What happens to a released engine crate when core makes a contract
  breaking change?
- **Cross-references**: OQ-04 (the contract being versioned), OQ-02.

## Deferred / Blocked

None currently. Every open OQ above is actionable Phase 1 architecture
work (contract pinning, design, quality read) with its evidence base
complete — no external arrivals are being waited on.