docs(arch): ADR-0008 read projection store + demo note for the event path (refs #7)
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m0s
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 45s
CI / unit (pull_request) Successful in 54s
CI / mutation (pull_request) Successful in 2m16s
CI / verify-stack (pull_request) Successful in 5m34s

ADR-0008 records the read-projection design: one rebuildable store shared by the Event
Subscriber (writer) and projection-api (reader) as one CQRS bounded context (reconciled
with §8.5), idempotency + rebuild from the notification log (no OpenZaak access, §8.1),
the deferred bsn/naam, and the new EF Core + Npgsql dependency. Add a demo-script entry
walking the OZ→NRC→subscriber→projection-api path and wire both into the MkDocs nav.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-06-30 15:11:36 +02:00
parent fa8382fc02
commit 0d0778036e
3 changed files with 126 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
# ADR-0008: The read projection — a shared, rebuildable store with a writer and a reader
- **Status:** Accepted
- **Date:** 2026-06-30
- **Deciders:** Respellion engineering
- **Relates to:** S-06 (#7); builds on ADR-0001 (loose coupling), ADR-0007 (#56, OZ→NRC wiring); first EF Core usage in the repo
## Context
S-06 (#7) adds the upstream event path's destination: an **Event Subscriber** that consumes
NRC notifications and a **read projection** the openbaar register reads. The walking-skeleton
projection (PRD §8.4) holds one row per zaak — `id`, `bsn`, `naam_placeholder`, `status`
and must be **idempotent** (NRC redelivers and reorders, CLAUDE.md §8.6) and **rebuildable**
(a derived artefact, never a write-only source of truth).
Two design questions had no obvious answer:
1. **Where does `bsn` come from?** The NRC `zaken`/`zaak`/`create` notification carries only the
zaak URL plus the fixed `kenmerken` (`bronorganisatie`, `zaaktype`, `vertrouwelijkheidaanduiding`).
It does **not** carry the bsn. Reading it means calling a ZGW API — which **only the ACL** may
do (CLAUDE.md §8.1). The issue's "Touches" lists only `event-subscriber` + `projection-api`,
not the ACL.
2. **Who owns the projection schema?** The subscriber writes the projection; the projection-api
reads it. CLAUDE.md §8.5 says "no direct DB access across services; each service owns its
schema." Two deployables on one table looks like a violation.
## Decision
**One Postgres database is the read projection. The Event Subscriber writes it (projector) and
the projection-api reads it (query); both are processes of the single "Read Projection" bounded
context and share one schema, defined in a shared `Projection.ReadModel` library. `bsn` is
deferred.**
- **Schema ownership.** The read model — `register_projection` plus the subscriber's
`processed_notifications` log — lives in `services/projection-api/Projection.ReadModel`
(EF Core + Npgsql). Both services reference it. This is the textbook CQRS read-model split
(one writer, one reader over one derived store), **not** the cross-*domain* DB reach §8.5
forbids: no domain owns write-state here; the projection is rebuildable (§8.4). §8.5 still
holds for every domain database.
- **Idempotency** is the primary key on `processed_notifications.key` (a deterministic key
derived from the immutable notification content). A duplicate insert raises a unique violation,
caught and reported as "already recorded", so the duplicate never reaches the projection. The
projection upsert is itself idempotent on the zaak id, a second line of defence.
- **Rebuild replays the log, not OpenZaak.** `POST /admin/rebuild` clears `register_projection`
and reprojects every row in `processed_notifications`. So "rebuildable" needs **no** ZGW access
(§8.1) and no ACL dependency — keeping S-06 within its stated scope.
- **`bsn` and `naam_placeholder` are deferred.** They are columns (nullable) but the minimal slice
populates only `id` + `status` (`INGEDIEND`) from the notification. Populating personal data
requires reading the zaak **through the ACL** (§8.1) and is its own follow-up; the column shape
is in place so that change is additive.
- **New dependency: EF Core 10 + `Npgsql.EntityFrameworkCore.PostgreSQL`.** What it gives us: a
migrated relational schema, LINQ queries, and a clean port implementation. What we'd write
instead: hand-rolled SQL + a migration runner. Risk: ORM complexity and an extra dependency
graph — bounded here to a tiny two-table read model. `dotnet-ef` is pinned as a local tool for
migrations; `NuGetAuditMode=direct` keeps EF's design-time-only tooling transitive out of the
audited, shipped graph.
The end-to-end path is verified by a runner-safe live-stack smoke (`infra/run-projection-check.sh`,
the `verify-projection` step of the `verify-stack` job, #58): register an abonnement at the real
Event Subscriber's callback, create a zaak, assert projection-api serves an `INGEDIEND` row — all
in-network, reaching services by container IP (ADR-0006/0007).
## Consequences
- **Positive:** the upstream event path reaches a queryable projection; idempotent and rebuildable
without OpenZaak; S-06 stays inside its stated touch-set (no ACL change); the projection-api is
ready for S-09 to tighten public-safe field filtering.
- **Negative / deferred:**
- `bsn`/`naam_placeholder` stay empty until a follow-up wires zaak reads via the ACL.
- The abonnement is registered by the verify harness (by container IP), not provisioned
persistently — ADR-0007 already deferred a persistent abonnement, and a single-label service
host is not URL-valid for NRC, so persistent registration needs a dotted network alias. Tracked
as a follow-up; a plain `make up` therefore needs the abonnement registered before the event
path flows.
- Two services share one database. Acceptable for a derived read model; revisit if the read and
write sides ever need independent scaling or storage.
## Alternatives considered
- **Subscriber reads OpenZaak directly to fill `bsn`** — rejected: breaks §8.1 (only the ACL talks
to ZGW) and would need its own ADR to bend the rule.
- **Extend the ACL with a zaak-read operation, consumed as a library** — viable and §8.1-clean, but
it grows S-06 beyond its stated scope (touches the ACL) and pulls personal-data handling forward;
deferred to a follow-up.
- **projection-api owns the DB and exposes an internal write endpoint the subscriber calls** —
rejected for the walking skeleton: adds an HTTP hop and a write surface on a read service for no
current benefit over a shared, rebuildable read model.
- **Separate databases for the log and the projection** — rejected as premature: both are the read
side's private, rebuildable state; one DB is simpler and still honours §8.5's intent.

35
docs/demo-script.md Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
# Demo script
A running log of demoable outcomes, one section per slice. Each entry is a short,
copy-pasteable walkthrough against a local `make up` stack.
---
## S-06 — Event Subscriber + read projection
**Outcome:** a zaak created in OpenZaak flows through NRC to the Event Subscriber, which
projects it into a rebuildable read projection the projection-api serves.
**The path:** OpenZaak → (notification) NRC → (abonnement callback) Event Subscriber →
`register_projection` → projection-api `GET /register`.
```bash
# 1. Bring the full stack up (seeds config, builds our services, waits for health).
make up
# 2. Register the Event Subscriber's abonnement and create a zaak, then read it back.
# (The verify-projection check does exactly this end-to-end and asserts the result.)
make verify-projection # → "OK — projection-api serves zaak <uuid> with status INGEDIEND"
# 3. Observe the projection directly via the read API (host port 8120).
curl -fsS http://localhost:8120/register | jq
# → [ { "id": "<zaak-uuid>", "status": "INGEDIEND", "bsn": null, "naamPlaceholder": null } ]
# 4. Idempotency + rebuild: replays don't duplicate; a rebuild repopulates from the
# notification log (no OpenZaak access needed — ADR-0008).
curl -fsS -X POST http://localhost:8110/admin/rebuild # Event Subscriber, host port 8110
curl -fsS http://localhost:8120/register | jq 'length' # → unchanged
```
> `bsn` / `naam_placeholder` are deferred (ADR-0008) — the notification doesn't carry them and
> the subscriber may not read OpenZaak directly (§8.1). They surface in a later slice.

View File

@@ -29,7 +29,9 @@ nav:
- "ADR-0005: Mutation testing": architecture/adr-0005-mutation-testing.md - "ADR-0005: Mutation testing": architecture/adr-0005-mutation-testing.md
- "ADR-0006: ACL integration test provisioning": architecture/adr-0006-integration-test-provisioning.md - "ADR-0006: ACL integration test provisioning": architecture/adr-0006-integration-test-provisioning.md
- "ADR-0007: OpenZaak → NRC notification wiring": architecture/adr-0007-notification-wiring.md - "ADR-0007: OpenZaak → NRC notification wiring": architecture/adr-0007-notification-wiring.md
- "ADR-0008: Read projection store": architecture/adr-0008-read-projection-store.md
- Working in Gitea: gitea-workflow.md - Working in Gitea: gitea-workflow.md
- Demo script: demo-script.md
- Runbooks: - Runbooks:
- CI: runbooks/ci.md - CI: runbooks/ci.md