Prepare the archive architecture review with explicit retrieval limits
A roadmap summary promises unlimited search and permanent audit availability despite the bounded design.
- Focused work estimate
- 1h 30m + prerequisites
- Priority in the scenario
- Medium
- Engineering practice
- Architecture communication · Evidence-based review
Estimated field mix
- System design70%
- Storage systems30%
Field percentages are editorial estimates of the ticket's engineering focus. They total 100%; they are not measured time, proficiency scores, or ownership evidence.
Review it, then add it to your workspace.
The board opens an editable draft; nothing is saved until you confirm it. Sign-in and workspace permissions apply, and Demo boards remain ephemeral.
Project context
A fictional procurement platform keeps append-only action records. Operators want fast recent search and affordable old records without losing provenance or leaking tenant data.
Setup prerequisites
- Create synthetic audit events and local storage/search adapters.
- Use an explicit fictional retention policy, not legal advice.
Preceding work
Complete these dependencies, or supply their agreed outputs before taking this ticket.
- AARCHIVE-101 · Define which audit questions require indexed search versus archive retrieval
- AARCHIVE-102 · Calculate archive storage growth from event size and retention assumptions
- AARCHIVE-103 · Choose hot and cold archive boundaries with a reviewable decision record
- AARCHIVE-104 · Define an immutable archive segment manifest
- AARCHIVE-105 · Specify search indexing as a rebuildable projection of archived events
- AARCHIVE-106 · Authorize archive retrieval before issuing object capabilities
- AARCHIVE-107 · Define archive query pagination across hot and cold boundaries
- AARCHIVE-108 · Model retention as a policy decision separate from audit immutability
- AARCHIVE-109 · Rehearse archive restoration from manifests after index loss
Acceptance criteria
- Summarize workload, retention and recovery assumptions.
- Link claims to manifest, authorization and restore probes.
- List deferred infrastructure and unresolved provider capabilities.
Implementation constraints
- Avoid presenting the local simulator as production storage readiness.
Verification to include
- Trace a recent-query guarantee to its contract.
- Trace a missing-segment scenario and document the user-visible limitation.
Deliverables
- Archive design review packet
Rollout and recovery
Review before storage commitment; revise the packet when retention or retrieval requirements change.
Value of the work
For the engineer: Practice storage tradeoffs, provenance and data-lifecycle decisions.
For the team: Review archive cost and retrieval guarantees before committing to infrastructure.
Evidence boundaries
Outcome Evidence: Tests, patches, and runbooks are requested deliverables. They become Outcome Evidence only through a qualified Mission and immutable Evidence IDs.
Ownership Evidence: Independent adaptation must be observed under a declared verification policy and cite immutable Evidence IDs. Completing a planning ticket establishes no Ownership Evidence.