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>
2.2 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 | grpc-advanced-bootstrap-c01 | 능력을 하나씩 등급 매기는 것이 설계다 | admission-budget-and-backpressure | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:grpc-advanced-bootstrap-c01 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
grpc-advanced-bootstrap |
능력을 하나씩 등급 매기는 것이 설계다
능력 15종을 한 깃발로 묶지 않고 각각 등급을 매긴다. 그렇게 하지 않으면 gRPC-Web을 켜는 결정과 xDS를 켜는 결정이 같은 결정이 된다.
본문
능력을 하나씩 등급 매기는 것이 설계다.
"Bundling them under one 'advanced' flag makes enabling gRPC-Web — a compatibility bridge with a proxy in front of it — the same decision as enabling xDS, which brings a control plane and its outage modes. They are not the same decision, and a single switch is how the second one gets made by accident."
| 등급 | 시작 가능 | production 별도 승인 |
|---|---|---|
ADVANCED_STABLE |
예 | 아니오 |
EXPERIMENTAL |
예 | 예 |
WATCH |
아니오 | — |
DISABLED |
아니오 | — |
기본 등급 분포는 ADVANCED_STABLE 11, EXPERIMENTAL 3(HEDGING·CUSTOM_LOAD_BALANCER·XDS), WATCH 1(EDITION_2026)이다.
EXPERIMENTAL에 두 번째 승인을 요구하는 근거
"The flag says somebody wanted the feature; the approval says somebody accepted that its failure modes are not fully characterised, which is a different person's decision on most teams."
이 기록이 다루는 파일 범위
:::evidence key="grpc-advanced-bootstrap-c01" alt="코드베이스에서 파일 목록을 만든 출력 9줄. 이 기록이 다루는 범위가 그 목록이다." caption="코드베이스 파일 목록 — 9줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::