HYPERFLEET-870 - docs: add ADR for eventual consistency on read path

[pnguyen44]

Description

Documents the decision to accept eventual consistency on LIST endpoints rather than adding transactional guarantees between COUNT and SELECT queries.

jira ticket

Changes

• Adds an ADR with benchmark data comparing approaches and the rationale for accepting the current behavior.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added architectural decision record documenting eventual consistency behavior in LIST operations, where concurrent data changes may result in pagination anomalies and count mismatches.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign aredenba-rh for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 9b0c84ba-6539-4806-875b-88380af26d4c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 13f8002 and fd5442c.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• hyperfleet/adrs/0015-eventual-consistency-for-read-path.md

---

Walkthrough

A new Architecture Decision Record (ADR 0015) is added to document the decision to maintain eventual consistency for the HyperFleet API LIST/read path. The document describes the current behavior where COUNT and SELECT queries execute separately without a shared transaction, resulting in potential total count mismatches and pagination anomalies during concurrent operations. The ADR records the explicit decision to accept this eventual consistency rather than implement alternatives like transaction-wrapped reads or window function synchronization, and provides benchmark data comparing performance trade-offs between the approaches.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and accurately summarizes the main change: adding an ADR documenting the decision on eventual consistency for the read path. It is specific, concise, and directly related to the changeset.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}