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>
16 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
16 lines
1.2 KiB
Plaintext
## 5. P3 — production 판정이 두 개의 리터럴 프로파일 이름에 걸려 있다
|
|
|
|
CLAUDE.md의 Forbidden 목록에 "local-dev in production"이 있고, 그것을 강제하는 코드는 이것 하나다.
|
|
|
|
```java
|
|
private boolean productionProfileActive() {
|
|
return activeProfiles.stream()
|
|
.map(profile -> profile.toLowerCase(Locale.ROOT))
|
|
.anyMatch(profile -> profile.equals("prod") || profile.equals("production"));
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
이 저장소가 `application-prod.yml`을 싣고 있으므로 **현재 형상에서는 맞는다**. 그리고 `150-...` §8.2c에서 확인했듯 같은 방식으로 production을 판정하는 leaf는 이것 하나뿐이다 — 저장소 전체가 공유하는 production 판별 장치가 없다.
|
|
|
|
문제는 방향이다. 이것은 **거부** 검사인데 판정 근거가 **허용 목록 두 개**다. `prd`, `production-eu`, `live`, `prod-apac` 같은 이름을 쓰는 fork는 이 검사를 통과하고, `filesystem-local-dev`가 production에서 조용히 선택된다 — 그 provider는 README가 "R1-only development provider"라고 적은 것이다. 실패는 startup이 아니라 데이터가 로컬 디스크에 쌓인 뒤에 드러난다.
|