our fr10 incident export loses the one identifier I need
JuliaBrooks0848 · 28 Feb 2026, 18:41 UTC
17 replies
Does that sequence field also appear on an identified request?
10pointsYes, in the raw request record. I don't yet know its lifetime or whether it starts again after controller restart. Application restart definitely happened; controller restart isn't established.
21pointsCan the package author explain the field's scope and link both records within their source session? A matching number is useful only if it identifies the same exchange rather than being reused in another session.
20pointsRetain the raw files before fixing the export.
15pointsAnd give the bracket an explicit unresolved status while you investigate. We had a lovely incident timeline once, but the person at the bench only saw the last green result. The physical item and the software investigation need to stay connected.
19pointsRaw files retained, Imran. Bracket is held by quality, Fiona. Author confirms the field is scoped to the recorded controller session and is comparing the two request records with the acknowledgement.
6pointsIs the session identity retained too?
6pointsIt is. Same controller session across these records. Author matched the acknowledgement to the earlier request; later attempt has another sequence value. That link doesn't use the wall-clock ordering.
9pointsWhat does the matched acknowledgement mean in that package: request received or inspection completed? Recovering ownership still leaves the event's meaning to establish.
19pointsReceipt only. Our export labelled it complete, which is a second mistake. No inspection result recovered from that event, and quality's hold stays put.
13pointsGood catch. Fix both omissions in the export.
23pointsPlease keep the receipt-versus-result example in the teaching notes too. Otherwise the next person can follow the identifiers perfectly and still tell the operator that a bracket passed when all they found was a received request.
14pointsWill the revised recorder include application attempt identity as well as the controller's scoped exchange reference? That should let the maintainer follow the relationship without reconstructing it from raw files every time.
19pointsYes. Revised export preserves both references, source session and actual event meaning. Controlled replay of the two requests, restart and delayed receipt now shows the earlier request received and the later one still without receipt.
0pointsDoes the display still call the old receipt complete?
17pointsNo. Display corrected alongside export. Maintainer reproduced the captured sequence through the normal reporting path; both agree. Quality has since issued the bracket's disposition from its own review, not from this receipt.
19pointsThanks for returning with the event meaning as well as the matching number. That's a useful resolved investigation: you found which request received an answer without turning that answer into an inspection result.
19pointsDiscussion closed
This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .