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>
2.1 KiB
2.1 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 | messaging-schema-protobuf-c06 | 평탄한 registry라 얕은 복사 문제가 없다 | state-machines-and-ownership | clean-architecture-backend-template | 게시 전 | 21234e38cdb9a926cbc92bb97a2aee2e4a7d2916 | concept:messaging-schema-protobuf-c06 | 2026-09-01 |
|
|
|
messaging-schema-protobuf |
평탄한 registry라 얕은 복사 문제가 없다
ProtobufMessageCodec은 불변이고, Map.copyOf가 여기서는 얕은 복사 문제를 만들지 않는다.
관계
- 검증되지 않는 스키마 파일은 문서임을 파일 안에 적는다 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
- 신뢰할 수 없는 입력 쪽 경계를 먼저 테스트한다 같은 분석 리프에서 끌어낸 규칙이다.
본문
ProtobufMessageCodec은 불변이다 — contracts는 Map.copyOf, maxBytes는 int. ProtobufMessageContract는 record이고 Class/Parser 둘 다 protobuf-java에서 스레드 안전하다. BoundedByteSink는 매 encode마다 새로 만들어진다.
ProtobufMessageCodec 참조 위치
:::evidence key="messaging-schema-protobuf-c06" alt="코드베이스에서 ProtobufMessageCodec 를 검색한 출력 14줄. 이 기록이 세는 참조가 그 출력에 그대로 보인다." caption="ProtobufMessageCodec 코드베이스 검색 — 14줄 · exit 0" zoom="true" :::
평탄한 쪽이 결함을 만들지 않았다
Map.copyOf가 여기서는 얕은 복사 문제가 없다 — Map<MessageContractKey, ProtobufMessageContract>가 이미 평탄한 한 레벨이다. AvroMessageCodec이 중첩 맵을 받아 flatten이 필요했던 것과 대비된다. 두 codec이 같은 registry 개념을 다른 형태로 받았고, 평탄한 쪽이 결함을 만들지 않았다.