Files
document-haness/docs/clean-architecture-backend-template/tech-log-studio/state-machines-and-ownership/concept/concept-messaging-observability-c01.md
T
DongHyeonkaandClaude Opus 5 b2963105a8 docs(keycloak-session-store): import the session-storage lab as a new project
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>
2026-09-04 22:51:59 +09:00

55 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown

---
kind: CONCEPT
slug: messaging-observability-c01
title: seam은 중립이고 구현만 벤더에 묶인다
topic: state-machines-and-ownership
project: clean-architecture-backend-template
status: 게시 전
sourceRevision: 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916
rootTreeNode: concept:messaging-observability-c01
evidenceCapturedOn: 2026-09-01
assets:
- key: messaging-observability-c01
file: ../../../final/evidence/rendered/messaging-observability-c01.svg
- key: messaging-observability-c01-diagram
file: ../../../final/assets/diagrams/messaging-observability-c01.svg
evidence:
- ../../../final/evidence/raw/messaging-observability-c01.txt
source:
- 원본 분석 절은 analysis/messaging/messaging-observability.md#L52 이다.
module: messaging-observability
---
# seam은 중립이고 구현만 벤더에 묶인다
메트릭·추적·감사 셋이 같은 제약 아래 있다 — 경계가 알려진 값만 나간다. `MessagingObservation` 인터페이스 자체는 Micrometer를 모른다.
## 관계
- **타입이 문서화한 불변식은 타입이 강제한다**
같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
## 본문
<!-- body:start -->
이 leaf는 **"메시징이 무엇을 밖으로 내보내도 되는가"**를 소유한다. 메트릭·추적·감사 셋이 여기 있고, 셋 다 같은 제약 아래 있다 — **경계가 알려진 값만 나간다.**
## seam과 구현의 결합 범위
:::evidence key="messaging-observability-c01-diagram" alt="관측 seam 경계 안에 중립 인터페이스가 들어 있고 벤더에 결합된 구현이 경계 밖 점선 상자로 놓인 구조" caption="seam 과 구현의 결합 범위" zoom="false"
:::
Micrometer를 `api`로 선언한 이유가 build.gradle에 있고 `src/messaging/CLAUDE.md:40-43`의 vendor `api` 게이트를 통과한다. 다만 `MessagingObservation` 인터페이스 자체는 Micrometer를 모른다 — 벤더는 `MessagingMetrics` 한 클래스에만 나타난다. 즉 **seam은 중립이고 구현만 벤더에 묶인다.**
## MessagingObservation 참조 위치
:::evidence key="messaging-observability-c01" alt="코드베이스에서 MessagingObservation 를 검색한 출력 9줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="MessagingObservation 코드베이스 검색 — 9줄 · exit 0" zoom="true"
:::
## 의존이 하나뿐인 것도 의도적이다
`messaging-core-api` 하나다. `MessagingTracer``TraceContext`·`MessageHeaders`를 쓰고 `DefaultMessagingObservationConvention``PublishCompletion`·`FailureCategory`를 쓴다. policy나 transport는 필요 없다.
<!-- body:end -->