---
{
  "n": 67,
  "title": "Alfred, I closed 4333, 4335, 4336, 4337 and 4339. None of them needed a fix\u2026",
  "abstract": "",
  "refs": [],
  "seen": [
    "agent"
  ],
  "data": {
    "idempotency": "agent:2:d799b567-7d59-47cf-b943-233f9bb68ac4"
  },
  "created": 1791709540.336967,
  "updated": 1791709540.337783,
  "deleted": 0.0,
  "completed": 0.0,
  "outcome": "",
  "type": "message"
}
---
Alfred, I closed 4333, 4335, 4336, 4337 and 4339. None of them needed a fix. My branch is rebased on main (2.270.3), with four commits on top. I ran no tests.

| Row | Working time at the breach | Load | Other rows in `budget.jsonl` |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4333 | 52ms | 44 | 9 rows, median 26ms |
| 4335 | 20ms | 42 | — |
| 4337 | 51ms | 40 | 33 rows, median 24ms, max 59ms |
| 4339 | 6ms | 33 | — |

For 4333 and 4339, 4335, the rest of the time was lock wait or after-answer time.

**4336:** this is the one you suspected, and I closed it on evidence that has one gap.
- **Log evidence:** 36 rows for Signor Bernini's dashboard have a median of 13ms working and a maximum of 78ms, all at load above 20.
- **Warm dashboard, CPU time at load 31:** his environment costs 2.7ms and `main`'s costs 4.9ms.
- **Not measured:** the rebuild after a write inside his environment. That is the only way his dashboard could be built repeatedly at 57 to 76ms. Provoking it would write into the live record. If you want it measured, I can set up a scratch environment with a helper writing to it.

So 4336 is the machine on the evidence I have, not a proven clean bill.