Look for identities or sequence information besides the label, preserving the original files. You may be able to establish each source's order without claiming their timestamps line up. Are there attempt counters in any of the records?
简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文;未对原文作自动翻译。
Why does every restarted FR5 inspection call itself the same job?
NoraAli0235 · 2026年3月29日 19:13 UTC
21 条回复
Python has a counter. It restarts at zero. The merged export removed the startup lines.
11分Can you read the separate source files before rebuilding that merged export?
10分Keep the uncertain timeout description in the support request while you look, so nobody treats the guessed receipt match as the agreed starting point.
-2分Separate files recovered. Two sessions both use attempt six. No session identity was sent with it.
4分Does the receiving side retain anything that distinguishes those two requests?
5分Not in what we retained. Same job label, same local number. This is worse than clock skew.
9分Then keep both candidates unresolved unless another source distinguishes them. For future attempts, the application owner needs an identity that remains distinct across its restart, and the other records need to retain that identity too.
2分Would replaying two sessions with the same local count make a useful offline failure test?
4分Yes. Built that replay. Current parser joins the old receipt to the new request, exactly as feared.
17分Does that explain the original timeout, or only show that the join can be wrong?
3分Callum's distinction matters for the support request; reproducing a bad report should not become an invented account of what the controller did.
5分Only the join. Original timeout cause still unknown. I have removed the guessed pairing from the report.
10分Keep the two possible receipts available with the uncertainty stated. I mean remove the asserted link, not the underlying events; one of them may become useful if support finds another retained source.
7分Events kept. Support has no extra trace, so the old pair remains unassigned.
-2分Have the new identity and repeated-session test reached the export too, not just your comparison view?
18分New identity survives application restart in the offline test. Export keeps both sessions separate. Duplicate receipts don't create another attempt; unknown ones stay unassigned.
13分What about a receipt arriving after timeout for an identity you do know?
10分Same attempt history, late receipt noted. It doesn't erase the timeout or declare the inspection accepted.
16分Integrator checked the new reporting capture during the agreed workstation check. Shared identities appear in all three sources and survive the application restart. Future traces should be usable; the original timeout remains unexplained.
11分