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>
2.6 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 | adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c24 | 질의 계층은 프레임워크가 아니라 세 단계의 정책층이다 | capability-and-disclosure-models | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c24 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa |
질의 계층은 프레임워크가 아니라 세 단계의 정책층이다
springdata와 querydsl은 application-core의 repository contract를 대체하는 generic CRUD layer가 아니다. JpaRepositoryFragmentSupport에는 범용 save/findAll/delete가 없다.
본문
현재 code shape는 대략 다음처럼 읽는 것이 맞다. springdata와 querydsl이 application-core의 repository contract를 대체하는 generic CRUD layer가 아니다.
질의 계층의 세 단계
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c24-diagram" alt="응용 계층 질의 계약과 springdata 와 hibernate 가 위에서 아래로 쌓이고 위임 방향 화살표가 아래로 그려진 구조" caption="질의 계층의 세 단계" zoom="false" :::
springdata/**는 allowlisted sort, keyset assembly/predicate, fetch-plan catalog, bounded stream lifetime, Specification safety를 맡는다. hibernate/**는 provider/version facts, 실제 Statistics/JDBC batch evidence, statement naming, batch/bulk/stateless provider optimization을 맡는다.
JpaRepositoryFragmentSupport 참조 위치
:::evidence key="adapter-outbound-persistence-jpa-c24" alt="코드베이스에서 JpaRepositoryFragmentSupport 를 검색한 출력 5줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="JpaRepositoryFragmentSupport 코드베이스 검색 — 5줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
범용 CRUD가 없는 이유
JpaRepositoryFragmentSupport에는 범용 save/findAll/delete가 없고, domain-owned adapter가 필요한 query mechanism만 조합하게 설계돼 있다. 이 방향은 support matrix의 "platform-owned generic CRUD repository는 unsupported"와 일치한다.