{"id":"no-subsystem-has-viable-recovery-strategy","text":"No subsystem at any architectural tier has a viable recovery strategy: storage-layer recovery is paradoxically over-engineered in infrastructure and under-implemented in usage (WAL builds complete but unused sequence/checkpoint machinery, with no safe crash recovery path), while application-layer event sourcing lacks durable persistence and uses conflated ID spaces — recovery fails both where infrastructure exists but is unused and where it was never built.","truth_value":"OUT","source":"","source_url":"","source_hash":"","justifications":[{"type":"SL","antecedents":["recovery-simultaneously-over-and-under-engineered","event-sourcing-unreliable-in-persistence-and-addressing"],"outlist":[],"label":"Two depth-3 conclusions spanning different architectural tiers (storage vs application) both conclude recovery is broken, but for opposite reasons — over-engineering vs under-engineering — revealing that no tier found the right calibration"}],"dependents":["degradation-is-irreversible"],"metadata":{"last_reviewed":"2026-05-30T09:01:17","review_result":"pass"},"created_at":"","updated_at":"","reviewed_at":"","verified_at":"","retracted_at":"","explanation":{"steps":[{"node":"no-subsystem-has-viable-recovery-strategy","truth_value":"OUT","reason":"SL justification invalid","failed_antecedents":["recovery-simultaneously-over-and-under-engineered"],"label":"Two depth-3 conclusions spanning different architectural tiers (storage vs application) both conclude recovery is broken, but for opposite reasons — over-engineering vs under-engineering — revealing that no tier found the right calibration"}]}}