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
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-observability-c01 | 논리 RPC와 물리 시도와 스트림 수명주기를 구별한다 | security-and-trust-boundaries | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:grpc-observability-c01 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
grpc-observability |
논리 RPC와 물리 시도와 스트림 수명주기를 구별한다
관측을 세 층위로 나눈다. Micrometer를 api로 노출하는 이유도 build.gradle에 적혀 있고 코드와 일치한다.
본문
build.gradle 주석이 이 리프의 범위를 적는다.
// build.gradle:3-5
// Bounded observability: logical RPC vs physical attempt vs stream lifecycle, with a cardinality
// policy that refuses payload, raw metadata and any actor/tenant/object/stream/idempotency
// identifier as a tag.
구별하는 세 층위
:::evidence key="grpc-observability-c01-diagram" alt="리프 경계 안에 논리 RPC 와 물리 시도와 스트림 수명주기 세 상자가 나란히 들어 있는 구조" caption="구별하는 세 층위" zoom="false" :::
Micrometer를 api로 노출하는 이유
build.gradle 에 적혀 있다 — "the observation convention's public signatures name Micrometer types, so wiring it requires naming them." 실제로 GrpcObservationConvention 의 생성자와 boundedTags 반환형이 Micrometer 타입(MeterRegistry, Tags)이므로 그 서술은 코드와 일치한다.
GrpcObservationConvention 참조 위치
:::evidence key="grpc-observability-c01" alt="코드베이스에서 GrpcObservationConvention 를 검색한 출력 12줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="GrpcObservationConvention 코드베이스 검색 — 12줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::