Skip to content

B1.4 (deferred spike): Evaluate one database-wait evidence shape #923

Description

@pedrosakuma

Parent, status and trigger

Parent: #919, Phase 2 / B1.4. Deferred catalog feasibility spike, separate from network waiting and consistent with #681's independently scoped catalog work.

Pick up after B1.2 (#921) and explicit maintainer prioritization. Reuse network-spike findings (#922) when useful, but do not make them a mandatory dependency.

Evidence and question

The four manifests in tests/DotnetDiagnostics.ScenarioEvaluation.Tests/Scenarios/ contain no dedicated database-wait case. Connection-pool guidance in docs/investigation-playbooks.md is not itself evidence of reproducible diagnostic distinguishability.

Can one selected database mechanism be distinguished from generic network or ThreadPool waiting using existing tools?

Bounded scope and acceptance

  • Select one provider and one mechanism (for example, pool acquisition waiting OR server-side execution waiting), with an isolated local dependency and healthy control.
  • Define which existing outputs can support attribution and which cannot, including explicit dependency prerequisites.
  • Bound setup, load, observations, repetitions, retained evidence and teardown.
  • Preserve competing generic-wait explanations and credit inconclusion when the collected evidence cannot distinguish them.
  • Produce deterministic replay evidence and a bounded live feasibility trial on one topology. Missing database prerequisites are unavailability, never a passing no-op.
  • Apply B1 blinding, provenance and human-review conventions.
  • Publish GO/NO-GO with a narrow catalog-integration follow-up only for GO. An evidence gap must not silently become a new collector project.

No provider matrix, combined pool/lock/query catalog, external database, SQL optimization benchmark or new MCP tool. Do not require production target instrumentation to make the case pass.

Validation and closure evidence

Reuse scenario manifest/replay tests and the isolated runner, extending them only after feasibility is demonstrated. Preserve provider/topology versions, configuration, actual observations, limitations and failures.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    diagnosticsAdvanced diagnostic features

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions