c22b2f9c08
The three replay guards shipped earlier lived on the in-memory SeanceState, which made them per-CONNECTION. I flagged that as an open residual at the time: drop the socket and reconnect — or just open a second one — and the client got a fresh empty guard and could be paid again for the same spirit. summon_limiter bounded the rate of that, never the total. `award_claims` is the durable form: one row per (seeker, presence, milestone), with a UNIQUE constraint doing the actual enforcement. The claim is a bare INSERT and losing the race raises IntegrityError, which is caught and read as "already paid" — a check-then-insert would let two sockets both read "unclaimed" and both pay. `crossing` is claimed by BOTH roads, so a spirit crosses once whichever road arrives first. Measured with the durable claim disabled: 5 reconnects paid 75 extra essence on the ritual, 60 on a verdict, 140 on the passage, and two simultaneous sockets paid 30 for one 15-essence ritual. The four tests that were failing were the tests, not the guard. They compared raw balances across reconnects, but re-opening a channel IS a summon, and SUMMON_ESSENCE_TRICKLE is paid per summon by design (inventory.py:42, bounded by summon_limiter rather than by any once-per-presence rule). The expected trickle is now stated explicitly so the assertion speaks about the milestone it is actually testing. Favor has no trickle, so it must not move at all — asserted separately. Anti-overshoot covered in both directions: a genuinely fresh presence still pays in full across a reconnect, a corrected verdict still pays on a second connection, and `test` stays freely repeatable since it never touches the ledger. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
62 KiB
62 KiB