Automatic resubmission is disabled for the investigation. The pending file is retained; I have not converted its rows to unsent just because no result is present.

Is there an attempt identifier on both sides, separate from the part or job name? I'd want to know what can actually link a receiver result to that pending row before discussing retry behaviour.

And does that identifier survive an application restart? A fresh counter can reuse an old number.

Only a job name in the old records. It can be reused, so I have no unique attempt link across the crash.

Keep the old outcome unresolved on that evidence. A better future identifier cannot retroactively tell you which old execution belongs to the row.

For the new design, the software and receiver owners need a durable attempt identity and defined handling of repeated delivery; otherwise moving the save earlier just shifts the crash gap to another line.

Oliver, agreed. I'd ask the test to stop after receiver completion but before the local save as well as before any send. Those are different cases for the recovery screen, even if the current helper calls both pending.

The draft now distinguishes unsent, outcome unknown and confirmed result. The old rows are not automatically assigned to those new categories; controls and quality will review the evidence they actually have.

Who sees the unknown rows while that review is open? They should remain visible without joining the completed count or the automatic work list.

The operator view will show a review hold and the identified job, with the review owner named. That is drafted, not tested. This old plate attempt still has no established result.

Will reopening during that review preserve the hold, rather than resurrect the automatic resend?