Integration checkpoint for epic-multi-chapter-membership-handling-data-layer
epic-multi-chapter-membership-handling-data-layer-integration-task — Integration Task
Integration Purpose
Verify integration with dependent epics: epic-multi-chapter-membership-handling-foundation
This integration checkpoint ensures proper coordination and compatibility between different epics. It verifies that all interfaces, data flows, and dependencies are correctly implemented before proceeding.
Integrates With Epics
Execution Context
Tier 3 - 413 tasks
Can start after Tier 2 completes
Handles integration between different epics or system components. Requires coordination across multiple development streams.
| Status | pending |
| Type | Integration |
| Estimated | 4h |
| Tier | 3 |
The Cross-Chapter Activity Query must avoid N+1 fetches across chapters. If naively implemented as a per-chapter loop, it will cause severe performance degradation for contacts affiliated with 5 chapters on poor mobile connections.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Design the query as a single PostgREST join of contact_chapters and activities on contact_id from the start. Add a query performance test with 5 affiliations and 100+ activities to the integration test suite and enforce a maximum execution time threshold.
Contingency: If a performance regression is detected post-merge, introduce a Supabase RPC function (stored procedure) to move the join server-side, bypassing any client-side N+1 pattern.
If the Duplicate Warning Event Logger write fails silently (network error, RLS denial), audit entries will be missing from the Bufdir compliance record without the user being aware.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Implement the logger with a local fallback queue: if the Supabase write fails, persist the event locally and retry on next launch. Log all failures to a verbose output channel.
Contingency: Add a reconciliation job that compares locally queued events to Supabase entries and re-submits any gaps. Provide a data export of the local queue for manual audit if reconciliation fails.
Two coordinators simultaneously adding the 5th chapter affiliation for the same contact could bypass the maximum enforcement check if both reads occur before either write completes.
Mitigation & Contingency
Mitigation: Enforce the 5-affiliation maximum as a database-level constraint (CHECK + trigger or RPC with a FOR UPDATE lock) rather than relying solely on application-layer validation.
Contingency: If a constraint violation is detected in production, run a corrective query to end the most recently created excess affiliation and notify the relevant coordinator.