Repository navigation
Subtree Repair 33 EN
The initial 2,000-request run acquired 1,995 catalogs; cache-preserving continuation reached 2,395/2,400. All five remaining snapshots belonged to Babel. After adding error classification, all five were confirmed to exceed the local 8MiB single-response bound. Do not infer authentication failure or timeout from the former generic error.
Freeze the repair plan first. GitHub recommends non-recursive subtree retrieval when recursive trees are truncated. Use this structure to obtain complete components instead of accepting an arbitrarily larger network response. Official Git trees documentation
--repair-subtrees handles only confirmed response-size overflow or explicit truncated=true. Discard partial responses. Obtain child identities from validated parent entries; reuse complete recursive child catalogs and expand only where needed. Ordinary request/auth/identity failures and corrupt caches do not silently enter this path.
Keep network responses at 8MiB and non-recursive validation at 2MiB. Preserve the overall 100,000-entry, 4,096-byte-per-path and16MiB total-path ceilings. Separately permit up to32MiB decompressed normalized assembled cache JSON. Bound manual expansion to depth64 and1,000 non-recursive trees per root, with30-second individual requests, minimum300ms spacing and the invocation request budget.
A failed child prevents root persistence; already verified child caches remain reusable. Recheck duplicate paths, parents, types, identities and size on the assembled root before atomic storage. Never dereference symlinks or submodule targets.
go run ./cmd/riido-filecatalog --repair-subtrees --request-budget 1500 --out .cache/file-catalogs-repair-newTests cover trigger classification, ordinary-error non-expansion, missing-child non-persistence, complete assembly, cache reuse and cycle/depth bounds. Full local Go race/vet, formatting and redacted checks passed. Actual repair, final all-2,400 coverage and offline replay are complete. This is not retrieval quality or LLM cost evidence.
Follow-up: recovery terminated successfully after763 requests with final coverage2,400/2,400. Final aggregate.
riidolaya is experimental. No demonstrated Codex cost savings; repository selection is preview-only.
riidolaya는 실험 단계입니다. Codex 절감은 미입증이며 저장소 선택은 preview입니다.
English README · 한국어 README · Versioned Wiki sources / Wiki 원본
이전 연구 안내 펼치기 / Earlier research
- 실제 이어 학습 V3 · 한국어 · Actual V3 training · English
- 진행·완료 보고·질문100건 결과 KO · 100-case results EN
- 라벨·이모지·상태 힌트 KO · Content/state hints EN
- 개발 진행·완료 보고·질문 pilot KO · Development pilot EN
- 작은 검증 기록 KO · Compact evidence EN
- 현재 개발 자료 35개·다음 학습 조건 · 35-row data and next training gates
- 개발용 학습 자료 2개 · Two qualified training requests
- 첫 두 과제 실제 관측 · First two actual observations
- 전체 사용법 KO · Full usage EN
- 작은 동작 힌트 KO · Small hints EN
- 설명 보강 비교76 · Caption diagnostic76
- Go 압축 가중치78 · Packed Go weights78
- 공개 함수 동작 검증 · Public function verification
- 다음 학습 자료 준비 · Training data preparation
- 동작에서 학습 정답·실제 학습79 · Grounded labels and actual fit79
- 소스 동작 관찰 · Source observations
- 저장 크기와 RAM · Storage and RAM
- 라이선스 · Licensing
- 시점별 기록 원문 / Chronological history
- 전체 연구 링크 / Full research index
- 문서 목록 / Documentation