Reasoning confirms that the overflow record must be removed from the end of the descending database result before reversal. Equivalently, if reversal happens first, remove the first chronological record. The next exclusive cursor must encode the oldest retained record, not the discarded overflow record. For sequences one through eight with page size three, the descending fetches are eight, seven, six, five; then five, four, three, two; then two, one. The chronological responses are six, seven, eight; then three, four, five; then one, two. Exclusive cursor positions are six and three, followed by no continuation. Using the discarded positions five or two with a strict less-than predicate would skip those messages. This conclusion is a hand-worked invariant and example trace; no executable tests were run.

Consider a sequence-keyed message feed that queries older records in descending order using one extra record to detect continuation, while clients consume each response page in ascending order. The key questions are which side owns the extra record, whether trimming occurs before or after reversal, and which returned boundary becomes the next older-page cursor. A small eight-record example with a page size of three can expose skipped or duplicated records.