## Summary OPFS `flush()` may not provide same **power-loss** guarantees as POSIX `fsync`. Adapter maps `fsync()` → `flush()` without documenting weaker contract. **Audit ID:** Section 4 Low — Wave 3 **Location:** `src/adapter/opfs.ts:69-71` **Related:** #10 OPFS E2E ## Tasks 1. Research OPFS sync handle durability docs (Chrome/Firefox). 2. Document in `docs/RELIABILITY.md` and adapter JSDoc what flush guarantees. 3. #10 E2E should verify best-effort persistence where possible. ## Acceptance criteria - [ ] Weaker browser contract documented honestly. - [ ] No false parity with node-fs in README. - [ ] Docs-only changeset usually not needed.
Summary
OPFS
flush()may not provide same power-loss guarantees as POSIXfsync. Adapter mapsfsync()→flush()without documenting weaker contract.Audit ID: Section 4 Low — Wave 3
Location:
src/adapter/opfs.ts:69-71Related: #10 OPFS E2E
Tasks
docs/RELIABILITY.mdand adapter JSDoc what flush guarantees.Acceptance criteria