DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5
b2963105a8
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
1.7 KiB
1.7 KiB
kind, slug, title, topic, project, status, sourceRevision, rootTreeNode, evidenceCapturedOn, assets, evidence, source, module
| kind | slug | title | topic | project | status | sourceRevision | rootTreeNode | evidenceCapturedOn | assets | evidence | source | module | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CONCEPT | app-bootstrap-c04 | 자동설정 안의 @ConditionalOnBean은 컴포넌트 스캔과 다르다 | identity-and-value-contracts | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:app-bootstrap-c04 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
app-bootstrap |
자동설정 안의 @ConditionalOnBean은 컴포넌트 스캔과 다르다
7개 main 파일 전부 @Configuration이고 @ConditionalOnProperty/@ConditionalOnBean으로 게이트된다. 자동설정 안에서의 @ConditionalOnBean은 Boot가 평가 순서를 통제하므로 모듈 14 §7.1이 경고한 위험이 없다.
본문
7개 main 파일 전부 @Configuration이고 @ConditionalOnProperty/@ConditionalOnBean으로 게이트된다.
세 조건을 함께 쓰는 자리
MongoPlatformHealthConfig가 @ConditionalOnBean + @ConditionalOnMissingBean + @ConditionalOnProperty 셋을 함께 쓰는데, 자동설정 안에서의 @ConditionalOnBean은 Boot가 평가 순서를 통제하므로 모듈 14 §7.1이 경고한 컴포넌트 스캔 상의 위험이 없다.
MongoPlatformHealthConfig 참조 위치
:::evidence key="app-bootstrap-c04" alt="코드베이스에서 MongoPlatformHealthConfig 를 검색한 출력 1줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="MongoPlatformHealthConfig 코드베이스 검색 — 1줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::