---
status: draft
last_updated: 2026-06-01
---

# Open Questions Tracker

Cross-cutting compilation of all unresolved questions across the storage
architecture documents, organized by theme.

## Summary

| Status | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Open | 10 |
| Resolved (this revision) | 18 |
| Previously resolved | 11 |

**Open questions requiring decisions:**

- **OQ-07** (encryptRaw performance) — low priority, add if needed
- **OQ-10** (Edit[] classification) — needs POC
- **OQ-11** (auto-migrate vs explicit) — conditional on OQ-10
- **OQ-12** (schema evolution vs event-sourced replay) — post-v1 concern
- **OQ-13** (schema evolution events in event stream) — post-v1
- **OQ-25** (scope string semantics) — evaluator concern
- **OQ-27** (tenant DB schema migration strategy) — multi-tenant operations
- **OQ-28** (cross-tenant delegation with separate DBs) — cross-DB coordination
- **OQ-29** (standalone drizzle-honker npm package) — community value
- **OQ-30** (composite event target for single-node hub) — latency optimization
- **OQ-31** (consumer naming for durable subscriptions) — restart stability
- **OQ-32** (Drizzle Kit migration compatibility) — custom adapter

## Theme 1: Package Boundaries and Dependencies

### OQ-01: Should @alkdev/flowgraph export a Type.Module?

- **Origin**: [metagraph-module.md](metagraph-module.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: Storage can start with standalone schemas. Adopt `Import()` when flowgraph provides a Module. No circular dependency.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-003, ADR-010

### OQ-02: Should concrete graph type Modules live in storage or their packages?

- **Origin**: [metagraph-module.md](metagraph-module.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Both. Storage provides reference Modules; packages may also export their own.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-003

## Theme 2: Data Model

### OQ-03: Should actors be a node type or a standalone table?

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Actors become `PrincipalNode` in ACL graph. `actors` table removed. `ACTOR_TYPE` replaced by `IdentityType` in AclGraph Module. See ADR-035.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-035, ADR-034

### OQ-04: Should the repository layer be host-specific or host-agnostic?

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Single host (SQLite). Question is moot — no dual-host repository needed. ADR-038.

### OQ-05: *EdgeConstraints entries use Type.Ref or Type.String?

- **Origin**: [metagraph-module.md](metagraph-module.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: low
- **Resolution**: `Type.String()` — constraint arrays contain names, not schemas. ADR-015.

### OQ-06: Graph pointer abstraction vs repository layer?

- **Origin**: [metagraph-module.md](metagraph-module.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: low
- **Resolution**: Direct key-based addressing for v1. Typed pointers post-v1. ADR-017.

## Theme 3: Encryption and Security

### OQ-07: Add encryptRaw() for performance?

- **Origin**: [encrypted-data.md](encrypted-data.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: low
- **Notes**: PBKDF2 adds ~100ms. Add if batch operations demand it.

### OQ-08: Should key attribute on secret nodes be encrypted?

- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: low
- **Resolution**: Plaintext for now. Add `keyHash` if names are sensitive.

### OQ-09: Should secret nodes have lastUsedAt and expiresAt as columns?

- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: low
- **Resolution**: JSON attributes for spoke, standalone table for hub.

## Theme 4: Schema Evolution

### OQ-10: Can Value.Diff Edit[] be reliably classified as breaking vs non-breaking?

- **Origin**: [schema-evolution.md](schema-evolution.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: high
- **Notes**: Theoretical classification needs POC validation.

### OQ-11: Auto-migrate data on schema change, or explicit consumer action?

- **Origin**: [schema-evolution.md](schema-evolution.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: high
- **Notes**: Conditional on OQ-10 POC outcome.

### OQ-12: Schema evolution vs event-sourced replay?

- **Origin**: [schema-evolution.md](schema-evolution.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Notes**: Post-v1. Honker streams enable event-sourced replay more naturally than before.

### OQ-13: Schema evolution events in event stream?

- **Origin**: [schema-evolution.md](schema-evolution.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: low
- **Notes**: Post-v1. Honker streams provide a natural transport for schema change events.

## Theme 5: Encrypted Data Scope

### OQ-14: Per-attribute, per-node, or per-graph encryption?

- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: Per-attribute. ADR-023.

### OQ-15: Key management in this package?

- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: No. Application provides key ring. ADR-026.

## Theme 6: Repository Layer

### OQ-16: Should repository layer live in storage or consumer?

- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: CRUD in storage; operations bridging in consumer. ADR-033.

### OQ-17: Attribute queries — JSON path, native columns, or dbtype-generated?

- **Status**: resolved (updated)
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: JSON path for metagraph attributes (dynamic schemas). Native columns for domain-specific tables (CallGraph, etc.). OperationSpecs provide the CRUD contract for both patterns. ADR-048 supersedes ADR-033.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-048

### OQ-18: Auto-generated vs hand-written CRUD?

- **Status**: resolved (updated)
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Not hand-written CRUD — OperationSpecs. Storage outputs `OperationSpec[]` from table definitions. The consumer (hub/spoke) registers handlers. ADR-048.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-048

### OQ-19: Storage-operations bridge package location?

- **Status**: resolved (updated)
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: No separate bridge package needed. Storage outputs `OperationSpec[]` as part of its table definitions (type-only peer dep on `@alkdev/operations`). The consumer wires specs into the registry. ADR-048.

## Theme 7: Access Control

### OQ-20: Should DelegatesEdge support expiration?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: low
- **Notes**: Session-scoped delegation could be modeled by creating/removing edges per session rather than adding `expiresAt`.

### OQ-21: Should ACL evaluator live in storage or hub?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: Storage provides traversal primitives; hub composes with operations `enforceAccess`. The single-host model (no PG/SQLite split) simplifies this — no cross-DB joins needed for ACL evaluation within a tenant DB. ADR-034.

### OQ-22: How are ACL graph instances created and managed?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: One ACL graph instance per tenant DB (ADR-040). The tenant DB is inherently org-scoped, so the ACL graph covers one org. No cross-org scoping issue within a single tenant DB.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-040

### OQ-23: BelongsToEdge derived or primary?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Derived. `organization_members` SQL table is authoritative for indexed lookups; `BelongsToEdge` in ACL graph enables traversal evaluation. ADR-045.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-045

### OQ-24: How does identityId reference hub entities without package dependency?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: medium
- **Resolution**: Logical string references, consistent with ADR-020. With identity tables now in `@alkdev/storage` (ADR-041), the `PrincipalNode.identityId` logically references `accounts.id` in the system DB. Same pattern, clearer provenance.
- **Cross-references**: ADR-020, ADR-041

### OQ-25: Scope string semantics for subset validation?

- **Origin**: [acl.md](acl.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: high
- **Notes**: Keypal's colon-separated hierarchical scope model with `*` wildcard. ACL evaluator must use same semantics. Scope matching is an evaluator concern, not a storage concern.

## Theme 8: Honker and SQLite

### OQ-26: Can Honker fully replace @alkdev/pubsub's Redis transport for single-node deployments?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: resolved
- **Priority**: high
- **Resolution**: Yes for single-node. The `HonkerEventTarget` adapter (ADR-047) implements pubsub's `TypedEventTarget` on Honker's `notify`/`listen` and `stream`/`subscribe`. POC 2-4 validated: same-process pub/sub works, transactional semantics hold, concurrent listeners work. Redis still needed for multi-node deployments. In-process EventTarget provides sub-ms latency for hot paths (vs ~17ms for Honker round-trip).
- **Cross-references**: ADR-047

### OQ-27: How are schema migrations applied across all tenant DBs?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: high
- **Notes**: Each tenant DB has its own migration history. When a schema change is deployed, all tenant DBs need migration. Options: (1) Migration queue — enqueue a migration job per tenant DB, workers claim and execute. (2) Lazy migration — migrate on first access. (3) Startup sweep — hub iterates all tenant DBs at startup and applies pending migrations.

### OQ-28: How does cross-tenant delegation work with separate DBs?

- **Origin**: [overview.md](overview.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Notes**: If a user in org A delegates to a user in org B, both tenant DBs are involved. The hub mediates. For v1, cross-tenant delegation can be deferred or handled via the system DB as a coordination point.

### OQ-29: Should the Drizzle-Honker adapter be published as a standalone npm package?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: low
- **Notes**: The adapter is ~100 lines and useful to anyone combining Drizzle with Honker. Publishing as `drizzle-honker` would benefit the community. Decision: start inside `@alkdev/storage`, extract later if there's demand.

### OQ-30: Composite event target for single-node hub deployments?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Notes**: POC 2 showed ~17ms median latency for Honker notify→listen vs sub-ms for in-process EventTarget. For single-node hubs, a composite that dispatches to both (in-process for speed, Honker for durability/cross-process) would be the ideal default. Design needed.

### OQ-31: Consumer naming convention for durable stream subscriptions?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Notes**: Honker's `stream.subscribe(consumer)` requires a consumer name for offset tracking. The name must be stable across hub restarts (PID-based names don't survive restart). Need a convention: `{service}:{host}` or a configurable consumer group ID.

### OQ-32: Drizzle Kit migration compatibility with Honker adapter?

- **Origin**: [honker-integration.md](honker-integration.md)
- **Status**: open
- **Priority**: medium
- **Notes**: Drizzle Kit supports SQLite migrations but expects `better-sqlite3` or `libsql`. Need to verify `drizzle-kit push`/`drizzle-kit generate` works with the custom Honker adapter, or whether we need a custom migration runner.

## ADR Impact

| ADR | Resolves | Informs |
|-----|----------|---------|
| ADR-003 | OQ-01 (partial) | |
| ADR-015 | OQ-05 | |
| ADR-017 | OQ-06 | |
| ADR-020 | OQ-24 | |
| ADR-023 | OQ-14 | |
| ADR-026 | OQ-15 | |
| ADR-033 | OQ-04, OQ-16, OQ-17, OQ-18 | OQ-17 (superseded by ADR-048) |
| ADR-034 | OQ-03, OQ-21 | OQ-25 |
| ADR-035 | OQ-03 | |
| ADR-038 | OQ-04 (moot) | OQ-17 (less pressure) |
| ADR-040 | OQ-22 | OQ-27, OQ-28 |
| ADR-041 | OQ-24 | |
| ADR-042 | | OQ-24 |
| ADR-043 | | |
| ADR-044 | OQ-19 (less pressure) | OQ-29, OQ-32 |
| ADR-045 | OQ-23 | OQ-20 |
| ADR-046 | | OQ-17 |
| ADR-047 | OQ-26 | OQ-30 |
| ADR-048 | OQ-17 (updated), OQ-18 (updated), OQ-19 (updated) | |