GPT Review — Gate A Production DDL Execution Results
GPT Review — Gate A Production DDL Execution Results
Date: 2026-04-28
Verdict
GATE A PASS, with two follow-up issues.
The canonical Gate A prompt v0.5 required Q1–Q8. The final read-only verification in the action log satisfies Q1–Q8. The stale CHECK=115 verifier was outside the canonical prompt and should not invalidate Gate A.
Action log reviewed:
knowledge/dev/laws/dieu38-trien-khai/reports/p9-gate-a-production-ddl-execution-log-2026-04-28.md
Evidence
| Canonical check | Expected | Final verified | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 tables | 14 | 14 | PASS |
| Q2 FK constraints | 17 | 17 | PASS |
| Q3 fn_tac_* total | 7 | 7 | PASS |
| Q4 trg_tac_* triggers | 6 | 6 | PASS |
| Q5 indexes | 41 | 41 | PASS |
| Q6 Directus/DB health | healthy/access | status ok + DB accessible | PASS |
| Q7 new functions SECURITY DEFINER | 6/6 | 6/6 | PASS |
| Q8 new functions search_path locked | 6/6 | 6/6 | PASS |
Additional evidence: 0 rows across all 14 tac_* tables, so Gate A did not seed data.
Incident assessment
The agent deviated by applying stale CHECK=115 expectation from G6/probe material. The canonical Gate A v0.5 prompt did not require CHECK=115. The canonical candidate and catalog both show CHECK=19.
The rollback attempt was unnecessary. It failed because fn_evt_trigger_guard_drop() attempted to insert NULL into trigger_guard_alerts.trigger_name. This exposed a separate trigger-guard bug.
Because final read-only verification confirms all intended Gate A objects remain and match canonical expectations, Gate A is PASS.
Follow-up issues
Issue A — Trigger guard DROP bug
fn_evt_trigger_guard_drop() can fail on DROP TRIGGER because it inserts NULL into trigger_guard_alerts.trigger_name.
Priority: High, because it can block future rollback/cleanup operations.
Recommended next step: create a small read-only investigation prompt for Claude Code to inspect fn_evt_trigger_guard_drop() definition, event trigger variables, and docs, then propose a fix gate. Do not mutate yet.
Issue B — Rollback SQL documentation error
Gate A prompt rollback listed trg_tac_enacted_immut on public.tac_publication, but production shows it is on public.tac_unit_version.
Priority: Doc patch, not production blocker.
Recommended next step: patch canonical Gate A prompt rollback section and add an errata note. Since Gate A already passed and prompt should not be re-executed as-is, this is archival correctness and future reuse safety.
Direction
- Mark Gate A PASS in index / P9 status.
- Do not run Gate B yet.
- First handle the trigger-guard DROP bug with a low/medium-effort read-only investigation prompt.
- Patch the Gate A prompt rollback documentation error as a KB errata.
- After trigger-guard DROP bug has a fix plan, decide whether to fix it before Gate B. Recommendation: fix before any gate that might require DROP/rollback.