Documentation Change Log

Quick access to recently updated documentation. Changes listed in reverse chronological order (newest first).

Recent Changes

2025-11-17

Documentation Feedback Mechanism 💬

Branch: docs/manual-testing-readme-and-memo-049-fix

Summary: Added interactive feedback mechanism to GitHub Pages documentation site. Users can select text and submit feedback directly to GitHub Issues, enabling Claude Code agents to query and act on documentation improvement suggestions.

Features:

Text Selection Feedback: Select any text on documentation pages to reveal feedback button
GitHub Integration: Creates structured GitHub Issues with selected text, page context, and user comments
GitHub Authentication: Only users with repository access can submit feedback (no spam)
Zero Infrastructure: Pure static site implementation using GitHub Issues as backend
Claude Code Integration: Python tooling for querying and processing feedback programmatically

Components:

docusaurus/src/components/Feedback/: React components for feedback UI
- FeedbackButton.tsx: Floating button that appears on text selection
- FeedbackModal.tsx: Preview modal before redirecting to GitHub
- Feedback.module.css: Responsive styling with dark mode support
docusaurus/src/theme/Root.tsx: Global integration into all pages
tooling/query_doc_feedback.py: CLI tool for querying feedback issues

Usage:

# List all open feedback issues
uv run tooling/query_doc_feedback.py list

# Show details for specific issue
uv run tooling/query_doc_feedback.py show 123

# Export feedback as JSON
uv run tooling/query_doc_feedback.py export --output feedback.json

# Close issue after addressing
uv run tooling/query_doc_feedback.py close 123 --comment "Fixed in commit abc123"

Issue Format: Feedback issues include:

Selected text and surrounding context
Page URL and path
Structured JSON metadata for automation
Labels: doc-feedback, needs-review

Benefits:

Users can provide specific feedback on confusing sections
Claude Code can discover areas needing improvement
No database or backend infrastructure required
Integrated with existing GitHub workflow
Trackable and actionable feedback loop

Netflix Video Reference: Database Migrations at Scale

Summary: Added AWS re:Invent 2023 video reference featuring Netflix engineers discussing strategies for safely migrating databases that handle millions of requests per second.

New Document:

Video: Database Migrations at Millions RPS: Zero-downtime migration patterns, dual-write strategies, and shadow traffic validation

Updates:

Netflix index page now includes direct links to all three video references

Unified Authentication and Session Management (RFC-062) 🔐

Branch: massive-scale-graph-rfcs

Summary: Comprehensive RFC unifying Prism's authentication and session management across human users, service identities, and admin operations. Consolidates existing work from RFC-010, RFC-011, RFC-019, RFC-024, MEMO-008, and MEMO-041 into a single reference with clear implementation status.

Key Document:

RFC-062: Unified Authentication and Session Management:
- End-to-end authentication flows for humans (OIDC/JWT) and services (K8s SA, AWS IAM, Azure MI, GCP SA)
- Complete session lifecycle management from establishment to teardown
- Credential hierarchy: client auth → proxy-plugin auth → Vault → backend credentials
- Cross-region session replication for global user mobility
- Defense-in-depth authorization at proxy and plugin layers
- Detailed implementation guide with working code examples

Implementation Status Audit:

✅ Phase 1 Complete (Production-Ready Auth):

JWT validation at proxy layer (prism-proxy/src/auth.rs)
Namespace-based authorization policies with test users
Auth context injection via HTTP/2 headers (trace-id, user-id, permission)
Zero-boilerplate plugin SDK (pkg/plugin/auth_context.go, auth_interceptor.go)
E2E integration testing with Dex OIDC provider (tests/testing/auth_integration_test.go)

❌ Pending Implementation:

HashiCorp Vault integration (JWT → Vault token exchange, dynamic credentials)
Service identity authentication (K8s SA, AWS IAM, Azure MI, GCP SA)
Distributed session store with cross-region replication
Admin API RBAC enforcement

Architecture Highlights:

Token Validation: JWT signature verification with JWKS from OIDC provider
Authorization: Namespace-based Read/Write permissions at proxy layer
Audit Logging: User identity and trace IDs propagated to pattern runners
Zero-Copy Forwarding: Auth headers injected via HTTP/2 HEADERS frame modification
Pluggable Backends: Support for multiple session stores (Redis, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL)

Security Features:

Per-session backend credentials (never shared across sessions)
Automatic credential rotation (every lease_duration/2)
Token refresh for long-running sessions
Defense-in-depth with proxy + plugin authorization
Comprehensive audit trail with distributed tracing

Related Documents:

Supersedes RFC-010: Admin Protocol with OIDC
Supersedes RFC-011: Data Proxy Authentication
Supersedes RFC-019: Plugin SDK Authorization Layer
Integrates with RFC-024: Distributed Session Store Pattern
Leverages MEMO-008: Vault Token Exchange Flow
Built on MEMO-041: Auth Integration Testing Guide

Remove Manual Testing Directory 🧹

Branch: docs/manual-testing-readme-and-memo-049-fix

Summary: Removed testing/manual/ directory and associated documentation. Manual testing should be performed using actual Prism tooling (prismctl, acceptance tests) rather than standalone bash scripts.

Changes:

Removed testing/manual/ directory and README
Updated prism-proxy/TRANSPARENT_PROXY.md to reference automated tests
Redirected users to proper testing infrastructure:
- Unit tests: cargo test (Rust), go test (Go)
- Integration tests: task test:integration-all
- Acceptance tests: task test:acceptance-all
- User acceptance: prismctl local start + manual interaction

Rationale:

Manual bash scripts lacked assertions and proper error handling
Not integrated with CI/CD pipeline
Duplicated functionality covered by automated tests
User acceptance testing should use real Prism tooling, not test scripts
See MEMO-040 for historical context

2025-11-15

Massive-Scale Graph RFCs for 100B Vertices 📊

Branch: massive-scale-graph-rfcs

Summary: Comprehensive set of 5 RFCs defining distributed graph architecture for massive-scale graphs with 100 billion vertices, trillions of edges, hot/cold storage tiers, distributed query execution, and fine-grained authorization.

Key RFCs:

RFC-057: Massive-Scale Graph Sharding:
- Hierarchical 3-tier sharding (Cluster → Proxy → Partition)
- Supports 100B vertices across 1000+ lightweight nodes
- Locality-aware partitioning strategies (consistent hashing, key-range, label-based)
- Dynamic partition rebalancing without downtime
- Query routing and cross-partition coordination
RFC-058: Multi-Level Graph Indexing:
- 4-tier index hierarchy (Partition → Proxy → Cluster → Global)
- Online index building without blocking queries
- Distributed WAL for incremental index updates
- Bloom filter cascade for fast negative lookups (333× speedup)
- Inverted edge indexes for backward traversals (972,000× speedup)
RFC-059: Hot/Cold Storage Tiers with S3 Snapshots:
- 95% cost reduction vs pure in-memory ($12.5k/month vs $105k/month)
- Multi-format snapshot loading (Parquet, Prometheus/Thanos, HDFS, Protobuf, JSON Lines)
- Parallel snapshot loading: 210 TB in 17 minutes (1000 workers)
- ML-based hot/cold classification with automatic tier management
- Distributed WAL with multi-tier updates
RFC-060: Distributed Gremlin Query Execution:
- Full Apache TinkerPop Gremlin specification support
- Partition pruning using multi-level indexes (10-100× speedup)
- Adaptive parallelism based on intermediate result sizes
- Cost-based query optimization with selectivity estimation
- Result streaming without full materialization
RFC-061: Graph Authorization with Vertex Labels:
- Vertex-level fine-grained access control
- Label-based authorization (tags like "pii", "confidential", "org:acme")
- Hierarchical clearances with wildcard matching (org:acme:**)
- Authorization push-down to partition level (<100 μs overhead)
- Comprehensive audit logging for compliance (GDPR, SOC2)

Architecture Highlights:

Scale: 100B vertices, 10T edges, 1000 proxies, 210 TB total data
Performance: Sub-second queries for common traversals
Cost: 86% reduction via hot/cold tiering
Security: Fine-grained authorization at vertex level

Use Cases:

Global social network graphs (Facebook/Meta scale)
Financial transaction networks (SWIFT/Visa scale)
IoT device networks (50B+ devices)
Knowledge graphs at web scale (Google KG scale)

Related Documents:

Extends RFC-055: Graph Pattern
Integrates with RFC-048: Cross-Proxy Partition Strategies
Leverages RFC-046: Consolidated Pattern Protocols
Uses RFC-051: Write-Ahead Log Pattern

Graph Implementation Readiness Assessment (MEMO-081) 🎯

Branch: massive-scale-graph-rfcs

Summary: Comprehensive readiness assessment for implementing massive-scale graph features (100B vertices) in prism-data-layer, identifying 15 critical gaps across 5 implementation phases with 16-20 week timeline.

Key Document:

MEMO-081: Graph Implementation Readiness Assessment:
- Analysis of RFC-057 through RFC-061 requirements against current codebase
- 15 critical gaps across distributed systems, storage, query infrastructure, authorization, and graph features
- Phase-by-phase implementation roadmap with acceptance criteria
- Risk assessment and mitigation strategies
- Testing strategy with coverage targets and success criteria

Implementation Phases:

Phase 1: Distributed Systems Foundations (4-6 weeks)
- Hierarchical partition registry (cluster → proxy → partition)
- Distributed routing table for opaque vertex IDs
- Distributed coordination service (etcd/Raft)
- Distributed write-ahead log (Kafka)
Phase 2: Storage Tier Infrastructure (4-5 weeks)
- Hot/cold/warm storage tier management
- Snapshot loading infrastructure (Parquet, Protobuf, JSON Lines)
- S3 multi-tier caching (Varnish → CloudFront → S3 Express)
Phase 3: Graph Query Infrastructure (4-5 weeks)
- Multi-level index infrastructure (hash, range, inverted, edge)
- Gremlin query parser and planner
- Distributed query execution engine
Phase 4: Authorization and Observability (3-4 weeks)
- Label-based access control (LBAC)
- Audit logging infrastructure
- Distributed tracing and observability
Phase 5: Graph-Specific Features (4-6 weeks)
- Super-node handling (sampling, circuit breakers)
- Dynamic partition rebalancing

Timeline: 16-20 weeks (4-6 months) of foundational work before graph implementation can begin

Risk Assessment:

High-risk: Distributed coordination, WAL replay consistency, S3 cost explosion
Mitigations: Use etcd (proven), comprehensive testing, mandatory caching

Recommendation: Invest 16-20 weeks in solid foundations rather than attempt graph implementation on inadequate infrastructure

20-Week Implementation Plan and MEMOs (MEMO-050 through MEMO-080) 📚

Branch: massive-scale-graph-rfcs

Summary: 24 MEMOs documenting 20 weeks of comprehensive work on massive-scale graph architecture, including production readiness analysis, RFC editing, copy editing, and production preparation.

Weeks 1-8: Foundation and Validation:

MEMO-050: Production Readiness Analysis (2,011 lines)
- 18 critical findings across cost modeling and operational concerns
- True TCO: $47M/year (not $7M) due to S3 request costs
- Network topology awareness: $365M/year savings with AZ-aware placement
MEMO-051: RFC Edit Summary (1,678 lines)
- 15 specific edits across RFCs 057-061
- Code examples and configuration snippets
- Priority-ordered action items (P0 → P1 → P2)
MEMO-052: Eight-Week Implementation Plan (1,345 lines)
- Extended 12-week timeline for thorough implementation
- Weeks 1-6: RFC implementation (2-3 edits per week)
- Weeks 7-8: Validation and integration testing
- Weeks 9-12: Extended copy editing

Weeks 9-12: Copy Editing and Readability:

MEMO-061: Week 9 Heading Hierarchy Audit (353 lines)
MEMO-062: Week 9 Paragraph Structure Review (332 lines)
MEMO-063: Week 9 Code Example Placement (508 lines)
MEMO-064: Week 9 Table Diagram Review (679 lines)
MEMO-065: Week 10 Line-Level Copy Edit (681 lines)
MEMO-066: Week 11 Terminology Consistency (454 lines)
MEMO-067: Week 11 Code Style Consistency (546 lines)
MEMO-068: Week 11 Final Consistency Review (438 lines)
MEMO-069: Week 12 Executive Summary Review (503 lines)
MEMO-070: Week 12 Technical Section Review (1,036 lines)
MEMO-071: Week 12 Operations Review (899 lines)
MEMO-072: Week 12 Final Readability Review (807 lines)

Weeks 13-20: Production Preparation:

MEMO-073: Week 13 Storage Backend Evaluation (1,383 lines)
MEMO-074: Week 14 Performance Benchmarking (837 lines)
MEMO-075: Week 15 Disaster Recovery (899 lines)
MEMO-076: Week 16 Cost Analysis (1,002 lines)
MEMO-077: Week 17 Network Infrastructure (1,562 lines)
MEMO-078: Week 18 Observability Stack (2,340 lines)
MEMO-079: Week 19 Development Tooling (1,647 lines)
MEMO-080: Week 20 Infrastructure Gaps (1,903 lines)

Total Documentation: 24 MEMOs, ~20,000 lines covering production readiness, copy editing, and implementation planning

2025-01-15

Template Consolidation and Author Field Standardization 📋

Branch: main

Summary: Consolidated duplicate ADR templates into single canonical template and added author field to all ADRs for consistent attribution.

Key Changes:

Template Consolidation:
- Merged docs-cms/templates/ADR-TEMPLATE.md into docs-cms/adr/adr-000-template.md
- Removed entire docs-cms/templates/ directory
- Single canonical ADR template with comprehensive sections
- Enhanced template with evaluation criteria and best practices
Author Field Addition:
- Added author field to all 62 ADRs
- Set author="Jacob Repp" across all ADRs
- Maintains existing deciders field for decision ownership
- ADR README.md updated with author and deciders fields

Template Improvements:

Added evaluation criteria section for objective decision-making
Enhanced consequences section (Positive/Negative/Neutral)
Better structured alternatives considered section
Clearer frontmatter with inline generation snippets
Cross-references to ADR best practices guide

Benefits:

Single Source of Truth: One canonical ADR template for all new ADRs
Consistent Attribution: Clear authorship across all documentation
Simplified Maintenance: Fewer templates to keep in sync
Better Guidance: Enhanced template with evaluation framework

Files Deleted:

docs-cms/templates/ADR-TEMPLATE.md
docs-cms/templates/MEMO-TEMPLATE.md
docs-cms/templates/RFC-TEMPLATE.md

Files Modified:

docs-cms/adr/adr-000-template.md (consolidated and enhanced)
62 ADR files (added author field)
docs-cms/adr/README.md (added author and deciders)

Related:

Complements PR #135: ADR Best Practices Guide
Works with PR #136: Timestamp Standardization
Uses tool from PR #137: Bulk Frontmatter Update Tool

Standardize All Documents to Use Created/Updated Timestamps 📅

Branch: main

Summary: Migrated all document types (ADRs, RFCs, MEMOs) to use consistent created and updated timestamp fields based on git history.

Breaking Change: ADRs now use created and updated fields instead of single date field.

Key Changes:

Template Updates: All templates now use created and updated fields
- ADR templates: Migrated from single date field to created/updated
- RFC/MEMO templates: Already used this format (no changes needed)
- Clear comments explaining when to update each field
Script Enhancement: Updated tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py
- Automatic migration from legacy date field to created/updated
- Unified handling for all document types
- Smart detection and conversion of old format
Schema Update: Updated tooling/doc_schemas.py
- ADR validation now requires created and updated fields
- Removed legacy date field requirement
- Consistent validation across all document types
Mass Migration: Converted 60 ADRs from date to created/updated

Benefits:

Consistent timestamp format across all document types
Tracks both creation date (immutable) and last modification (updates)
Git history remains source of truth
Better tracking of document lifecycle
Enables queries like "recently updated" vs "recently created"

Migration Details:

60 ADRs migrated from legacy format
141 total documents updated with git-based timestamps
All documents validated successfully
No manual intervention required

Related Files:

Templates: docs-cms/adr/adr-000-template.md, docs-cms/templates/ADR-TEMPLATE.md
Script: tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py (enhanced)
Schema: tooling/doc_schemas.py (updated)

Automated Document Timestamp Management 🕐

Branch: main

Summary: Enhanced template date fields with generation snippets and created automated tooling to sync document timestamps with git history.

Key Features:

Template Improvements: Updated all templates with clearer date generation instructions
- ADR template: Clarified that 'date' field tracks status changes
- RFC/MEMO templates: Already had detailed 'created' and 'updated' field comments
- Added multi-line comments for better readability
Git-based Timestamp Script: New tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py
- Uses git log to find document creation date (first commit)
- Uses git log to find last modification date (most recent commit)
- ADRs: Updates 'date' field to last modification
- RFCs/MEMOs: Updates 'created' to first commit, 'updated' to last modification
- Supports dry-run mode for safe preview
- Verbose output for tracking changes
Mass Update: Updated 145 of 165 documents with accurate git-based timestamps

Usage:

# Preview changes
uv run tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py --dry-run -v

# Update all documents
uv run tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py

# Update specific file
uv run tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py --path docs-cms/adr/adr-001-rust-for-proxy.md

Benefits:

Accurate timestamps reflecting true document history
Automated maintenance reduces manual errors
Templates now have clearer instructions for new documents
Git history becomes source of truth for document lifecycle
Supports both date formats (single 'date' for ADRs, 'created'/'updated' for RFCs/MEMOs)

Updated Files:

Template: docs-cms/adr/adr-000-template.md (improved comments)
Script: tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py (new)
145 documents updated with accurate git-based timestamps

Bulk Frontmatter Update Tool 🔧

Branch: main

Summary: Created general-purpose command-line tool for bulk updates to YAML frontmatter fields across documentation, enabling safe and efficient metadata management.

Key Features:

Four Operations:
- set: Update or create field (overwrites existing)
- add: Create field only if doesn't exist
- remove: Delete field from frontmatter
- rename: Change field name while preserving value
Flexible Filtering:
- Filter by document type (--type adr|rfc|memo)
- Filter by glob patterns (--glob "adr-0*")
- Specify single file (--path docs-cms/adr/adr-001.md)
Safety Features:
- Dry-run mode (--dry-run) for safe preview
- Verbose output (-v) for tracking changes
- Validation after updates
Batch Processing: Efficiently updates hundreds of files in seconds

Usage Examples:

# Set status to Accepted for all ADRs
uv run tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py --type adr --set status=Accepted

# Add priority field to specific RFCs
uv run tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py --glob "rfc-04*" --add priority=high

# Remove deprecated field from all docs
uv run tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py --remove deprecated

# Rename field across all memos
uv run tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py --type memo --rename old_name=new_name

# Preview changes without modifying files
uv run tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py --type adr --set author="Jacob Repp" --dry-run

Benefits:

Consistency: Update metadata across all documents uniformly
Efficiency: Bulk operations replace tedious manual edits
Safety: Dry-run mode prevents accidental changes
Flexibility: Multiple operations and filtering options
Maintainability: Single tool for all frontmatter management

Use Cases:

Standardize author/decider fields across documentation
Update status for multiple related ADRs
Add new required fields to existing documents
Remove deprecated fields during schema migrations
Rename fields for consistency

Files Created:

tooling/bulk_update_frontmatter.py (411 lines)

Related Tools:

tooling/update_doc_timestamps.py - Git-based timestamp management
tooling/validate_docs.py - Document validation

ADR Best Practices Guide 📋

Branch: main

Summary: Comprehensive guide for creating, reviewing, and maintaining Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) in Prism, adapted from industry best practices.

Key Features:

When to Create ADRs: Clear criteria for significant impact, long-term ramifications, and cross-team decisions
Evaluation Framework: Explicit scoring rubric with weighted criteria for objective decision-making
Do's and Don'ts: Practical guidance on writing effective ADRs
- DO: Keep brief (≤800 words), explain trade-offs, be honest about cons
- DON'T: Hide doubts, make it a sales pitch, skip deep investigation
Status Lifecycle: Clear progression from Proposed → Accepted → Deprecated/Superseded
Review Process: 3-5 day timeline with stakeholder engagement
Integration with Workflow: Commands for creating, validating, and linking ADRs

New Resources:

Guide: docs-cms/guides/adr-best-practices.md
Slash Command: /adr-guide for quick reference
Updated CLAUDE.md with ADR section references

Benefits:

Forces thoughtful evaluation with explicit criteria and weights
Improves team communication with documented rationale
Prevents analysis paralysis ("pretty good now" beats "perfect later")
Creates institutional knowledge that survives team changes
Encourages honesty about trade-offs and uncertainties

Related:

Template: docs-cms/adr/adr-000-template.md
Example: ADR-049: Podman Optimization

2025-11-14

RFC-056: Unified Configuration Model 🎯

Branch: main

Summary: Consolidates and clarifies Prism's configuration story across all layers: user-facing namespace configuration, operator-managed backend/frontend registries, developer workflow, and authorization boundaries.

Key Contributions:

Terminology Standardization: Establishes canonical terms across all docs
- "pattern" (not "api" or "client_api")
- "needs" (not "requirements" or "guarantees")
- "slot" (not "backend_requirement")
- "capability" vs "interface" distinction clarified
Six-Layer Configuration Model: Clear hierarchy from user request to runtime execution
- Layer 1: User Request (Application Owner)
- Layer 2: Platform Policy (Authorization & Quotas)
- Layer 3: Pattern Selection (Platform Intelligence)
- Layer 4: Backend Binding (Operator-Managed)
- Layer 5: Frontend Exposure (Operator-Managed)
- Layer 6: Runtime Execution (Pattern Runners & Proxies)
Authorization Consolidation: Unified permission model
- 3 Permission Levels: Guided (default), Advanced (approved), Expert (platform team)
- Team Quotas: Aggregate limits across namespaces
- Topaz Policy Integration: Fine-grained RBAC/ABAC enforcement
Multi-Tenancy Model: Clear hierarchy and relationships
- Tenant → Team → Namespace hierarchy
- Cross-namespace patterns (shared backends, pub/sub communication)
- Cross-team access restrictions with policy-based exceptions
Role-Based Responsibilities: Explicit definitions for each persona
- Application Owner (User): Controls pattern, needs, access policies
- Platform Operator (Operator): Manages backends, frontends, team quotas
- Platform Developer (Developer): Implements patterns, drivers, adapters
Configuration Precedence Rules: Clear override hierarchy
- Platform Policy > User Request > Pattern Defaults > Backend Capabilities > Global Defaults

Documents Consolidated:

ADR-002: Client-Originated Configuration
ADR-006: Namespace and Multi-Tenancy
ADR-007: Authentication and Authorization
ADR-022: Dynamic Client Configuration
ADR-050: Topaz Policy Authorization
RFC-014: Layered Data Access Patterns
RFC-027: Namespace Configuration Client Perspective
RFC-039: Backend Configuration Registry
MEMO-006: Backend Interface Decomposition

Benefits:

Single consistent vocabulary across all configuration documents
Clear understanding of who controls what configuration
Eliminates confusion between different permission/authorization models
Provides mental model for configuration flow from user intent to execution
No breaking changes - consolidation only

Related:

RFC-056: Unified Configuration Model

Documentation Updates: RFC-056 Consistency and Cross-Linking 🔗

Branch: main

Summary: Updated 8 core configuration documents with RFC-056 cross-references and standardized terminology.

Documents Updated:

ADR-002: Client-Originated Configuration - Added permission level references
ADR-006: Namespace and Multi-Tenancy - Added multi-tenancy hierarchy reference
ADR-007: Authentication and Authorization - Added authorization model reference
ADR-050: Topaz Policy Authorization - Added Topaz integration reference
RFC-014: Layered Data Access Patterns - Updated to Layer 3 reference
RFC-027: Namespace Configuration - Standardized "pattern" vs "client_api" terminology
RFC-039: Backend Configuration Registry - Added Layer 4 & 5 reference
MEMO-006: Backend Interface Decomposition - Added backend binding reference

Key Changes:

Terminology Standardization: Consistent use of "pattern" (not "client_api"), "needs" (not "requirements")
Cross-Linking: Added 35 new cross-references between related documents (627 total links)
Consolidation Notes: Each document now references RFC-056 for the complete unified model
Related Documents: Comprehensive cross-reference sections added to all documents

Benefits:

Easier navigation between related concepts
Clear indication of how documents relate to unified model
Consistent vocabulary across entire documentation set

2025-11-11

Testing: Migrate Manual Tests to Automated Go Integration Tests 🧪

Branch: migrate-manual-tests-to-automated

Summary: Migrated manual bash test scripts to automated Go integration tests and enhanced e2e test suite with comprehensive test coverage.

Key Changes:

Enhanced E2E Tests (tests/e2e/transparent_proxy_test.go):
- Added "Expire existing key" test case covering TTL operations
- Added "Complete CRUD sequence" test covering full lifecycle
- Tests now cover all scenarios from manual test scripts
New Test Tasks (testing/Taskfile.yml):
- test:e2e-transparent-proxy - Run transparent proxy E2E tests
- test:e2e-all - Run all E2E tests with infrastructure
- Updated test:all to include e2e tests in comprehensive suite
- Updated help output to document e2e test tasks
Documentation Templates Updated:
- Added UUID generation snippets: uuidgen | tr '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' or python -c "import uuid; print(uuid.uuid4())"
- Added date generation snippets: date +%Y-%m-%d or python -c "from datetime import date; print(date.today())"
- Updated all templates: ADR-TEMPLATE.md, RFC-TEMPLATE.md, MEMO-TEMPLATE.md, adr-000-template.md

Benefits:

Automated execution in CI/CD pipeline
Proper assertions and error handling
Better integration with test infrastructure
Part of comprehensive test suite
Eliminates need for manual bash scripts

Replaced Manual Scripts:

test_transparent_proxy.sh - Basic KeyValue operations
test_ttl_operations.sh - TTL operations (Expire, GetTTL, Persist)
test_transparent_proxy_local.sh - Full stack integration

2025-10-27

RFC-049: Mailbox Lifecycle, Lease Management, and Routing Coordination 🏗️

Branch: jrepp/shared-acceptance-patterns

Summary: Comprehensive RFC exploring mailbox lifecycle management, TTL-based lease coordination, and routing infrastructure. Recommends raft-based admin plane over etcd or Redis for distributed coordination, aligning with project philosophy of minimal infrastructure dependencies and local-first testing.

Key Decisions:

Lease Backend: Raft-based admin plane (recommended)
- Zero new infrastructure dependencies
- Leverages existing admin control plane (ADR-055)
- Consistent with namespace lease management (RFC-047)
- Aligns with local-first testing (ADR-004)
- Strong consistency via raft consensus
Rejected Alternatives:
- etcd: Too complex (3-5 node cluster), conflicts with minimal dependencies
- Redis: Weak consistency, key expiration imprecise, split-brain risk

Architecture:

Routable Identity: {namespace}@{proxy_id} format (e.g., $admin@proxy-01)
Lease Protocol: Pattern runners acquire/renew/release leases via admin gRPC
Session Management: Heartbeat every 60s, TTL 300s, grace period 60s
Routing Coordination: Admin distributes mailbox routing table to all proxies
Query Forwarding: Proxies forward mailbox queries to owning pattern runner
Partition Alignment: Uses RFC-048 consistent hashing (0-255 partitions)

Protocol Operations:

service ControlPlane {
  rpc AcquireLease(AcquireLeaseRequest) returns (AcquireLeaseResponse);
  rpc ReleaseLease(ReleaseLeaseRequest) returns (ReleaseLeaseResponse);
  rpc MailboxHeartbeat(MailboxHeartbeatRequest) returns (MailboxHeartbeatResponse);
  rpc UpdateMailboxRoute(MailboxRouteUpdate) returns (MailboxRouteUpdateAck);
}

Storage Schema (ADR-054):

mailbox_leases table: Lease state with TTL tracking
mailbox_routes table: Routing table distributed to proxies
Raft log: Linearizable lease operations

Benefits:

Simplified Deployment: No etcd/Redis clusters to manage
Built-In Coordination: Raft consensus already in admin plane
Routable Queries: Clients query any proxy, forwarded to correct runner
Automatic Cleanup: Expired leases removed after grace period
Local-First Testing: Single admin process for dev/test
Unified Operations: Same monitoring/metrics for all leases

Trade-Offs Accepted:

Admin plane becomes critical path (already true for namespaces)
Lease performance ~5ms vs ~1ms Redis (acceptable for control plane)

Related Documents:

Dual Schema Configuration for Envelope and Payload Validation 📋

Branch: jrepp/shared-acceptance-patterns

Summary: Added comprehensive schema configuration for both PrismEnvelope (universal wrapper) and payload schemas (application-specific messages) to namespace configuration. Renamed MailboxEvent to MailboxItem for semantic clarity.

Key Changes:

RFC-031: Dual Schema Configuration
- Added "Schema Context Integration" section with envelope + payload schemas
- Namespace config now includes schemas.envelope (PrismEnvelope) and schemas.payload (application schemas)
- Schema validation modes: strict, warn, disabled
- Multiple payload schemas per namespace with topic mapping
- Example: OrderCreated, OrderUpdated, OrderCancelled schemas for order-events namespace
RFC-037: Mailbox Pattern Schema Validation
- Added complete schema configuration example with admin events
- New "Schema Validation" section explaining validation flow
- Validates both envelope structure and payload schema before storage
- Schema enforcement modes with use case recommendations
- Updated indexed_headers to include trace_id for observability
Naming Improvement: MailboxEvent → MailboxItem
- Renamed across both RFC-031 and RFC-037
- Better semantic clarity: stored items aren't strictly "events"

Schema Configuration Example:

namespaces:
  - name: order-events
    schemas:
      envelope:
        url: github.com/prism-project/prism/proto/envelope/v1/envelope.proto
        version: v1
        validation: strict
      payload:
        url: github.com/myorg/schemas/order-events/v2
        version: v2
        schemas:
          - topic: orders.created
            message_name: OrderCreated
        validation: strict
        compatibility: backward

Benefits:

Type Safety: Both envelope and payload validated before processing
Schema Evolution: Compatibility mode ensures backward/forward compatibility
Error Detection: Invalid messages rejected at ingestion time
Documentation: Schema URLs serve as living documentation
Multi-Topic: Single namespace can handle multiple message types

Related Documents:

Generalized PrismEnvelope Format for All Messaging Patterns 🎯

Branch: jrepp/shared-acceptance-patterns

Summary: Expanded RFC-031 from pub/sub-specific to universal message envelope protocol, and updated RFC-037 (Mailbox Pattern) to consume PrismEnvelope format for searchable event storage.

Key Changes:

RFC-031 Expanded: "Message Envelope Protocol for Pub/Sub Systems" → "Universal Message Envelope Protocol"
- Added pattern-agnostic design supporting PubSub, Queue, Mailbox, Request/Response, and Multicast Registry
- New section: "Universal Envelope Across Patterns" with comparison table
- New section: "Pattern-Specific Envelope Usage" showing how each pattern uses envelope fields
- Mailbox Pattern example: Extract indexed headers from envelope, store full envelope as blob
- Updated abstract and motivation to emphasize pattern-agnostic design
RFC-037 Updated: Mailbox Pattern now uses PrismEnvelope (RFC-031)
- Changed from custom PubSubMessage struct to PrismEnvelope
- Updated header extraction to use envelope fields: metadata.message_id, security.publisher_id, observability.trace_id, etc.
- Updated table schema to include envelope_blob BLOB NOT NULL for full message reconstruction
- Added ExtractMailboxItem() function to convert PrismEnvelope → MailboxItem
- Added ReconstructEnvelope() method to deserialize envelope from blob
- Updated comparison table showing PrismEnvelope benefits
- Added RFC-031 reference in related RFCs

Benefits:

Consistency: Single envelope format across all patterns reduces implementation complexity
Observability: Built-in trace_id, span_id indexing for distributed tracing
Security: Envelope encryption metadata preserved in mailbox storage
Evolution: Envelope versioning supports schema evolution without breaking changes
Full Context: Storing complete envelope enables later reconstruction of all metadata

Related Documents:

2025-10-26

Shared Acceptance Test Patterns: Reusable Multi-Backend Testing Framework ✅

Branch: jrepp/shared-acceptance-patterns

Summary: Extracted generalizable testing patterns from KeyValue acceptance tests into shared package, enabling any test suite to easily run against multiple backends in parallel. Applied pattern to Redis integration tests as proof of concept.

Key Improvements:

Shared Testing Package: Created tests/testing/backends/acceptance_helpers.go with reusable patterns
- BackendSetup struct for configuring multiple backends
- RunMultiBackendTests() - Execute tests against multiple backends in parallel
- RunMultiBackendSubtests() - Structured subtests across backends
- PodmanCompatibilityDoc() - Standard documentation for Podman/macOS setup
KeyValue Backend Helpers: tests/testing/backends/keyvalue_backends.go
- SetupMemStoreKeyValue() - MemStore backend setup with plugin.Plugin signature
- SetupRedisKeyValue() - Redis backend setup with per-test container isolation
- GetKeyValueBackends() - Convenience function for all KeyValue backends
Redis Integration Tests Refactored: Applied shared patterns to tests/acceptance/redis/
- Removed TestMain with shared container (conflicted with t.Parallel())
- Added multi-backend support - now tests both MemStore and Redis
- Replaced fixed 4-second sleep with intelligent polling (100ms intervals)
- Enabled full parallel execution with t.Parallel()
- Improved TTL test from 4s to 1.02s (optimal)

Performance Gains:

Redis tests: >50% faster (4s sleep eliminated, replaced with polling)
Total runtime: 2.084s for 26 test assertions (13 tests × 2 backends)
MemStore tests: <1ms (except TTL: 1.01s)
Redis tests: ~0.7-0.8s per test group (including container lifecycle)
All tests run in parallel across backends

Developer Benefits:

Code Reuse: Any acceptance test can use these patterns
Consistency: Standard approach across all multi-backend tests
Maintainability: Single source of truth for multi-backend testing patterns
Documentation: Standard Podman/macOS setup instructions
Isolation: Per-test containers prevent cross-test contamination

Files Created:

tests/testing/backends/acceptance_helpers.go (119 lines) - Core testing framework
tests/testing/backends/keyvalue_backends.go (107 lines) - KeyValue-specific helpers

Files Modified:

tests/acceptance/redis/redis_integration_test.go (366 lines) - Complete refactor using shared patterns

Migration Path: Other acceptance tests (NATS, PostgreSQL, Kafka) can now easily adopt these patterns for multi-backend testing with minimal code changes.

KeyValue Pattern Acceptance Tests: Multi-Backend Parallel Execution ✅

Branch: jrepp/rfc-046-keyvalue-memstore-impl

Summary: Enabled Redis backend in KeyValue pattern acceptance tests with full parallel execution across both MemStore and Redis backends. Fixed Podman/macOS testcontainers compatibility issue.

Key Changes:

Multi-Backend Testing: Re-enabled Redis backend alongside MemStore (2 backends × 32 tests = 64 total assertions)
Parallel Execution: All 10 test suites run in parallel with t.Parallel() for maximum speed
Podman Compatibility: Resolved testcontainers Ryuk volume mount issue on Podman/macOS
- Root cause: Ryuk tries to mount Podman socket as volume, which fails on macOS VM
- Solution: Set TESTCONTAINERS_RYUK_DISABLED=true environment variable
- Impact: Tests work perfectly with Podman, no functionality lost
Zero Sleeps: Confirmed no time.Sleep calls - tests run at full rate
Test Execution: All 64 tests passing in 19s (MemStore <1s, Redis ~2s per suite due to container startup)

Performance:

MemStore tests: <1s (in-memory, zero latency)
Redis tests: ~2s per test suite (includes container create/start/stop)
Total runtime: 19s for 64 test assertions across 2 backends
Fully parallelized - multiple Redis containers running concurrently

Test Coverage (32 subtests per backend):

TestPatternService_Store (5 subtests)
TestPatternService_Retrieve (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_Remove (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_Exists (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_StoreBatch (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_RetrieveBatch (2 subtests)
TestPatternService_ListKeys (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_ConcurrentOperations (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_EdgeCases (3 subtests)
TestPatternService_ExpirationOperations (4 subtests)

Files Modified:

tests/acceptance/patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service_test.go: Added package documentation with Podman setup instructions, re-enabled Redis in getBackends()

Running Tests:

# Podman on macOS
export TESTCONTAINERS_RYUK_DISABLED=true
export DOCKER_HOST="unix://$(podman machine inspect --format '{{.ConnectionInfo.PodmanSocket.Path}}')"
cd tests/acceptance/patterns/keyvalue
go test -v -parallel 10 -timeout 10m

# Docker Desktop (no Ryuk disable needed)
cd tests/acceptance/patterns/keyvalue
go test -v -parallel 10 -timeout 10m

Status: Full multi-backend acceptance testing validated. Both MemStore and Redis patterns work perfectly with zero artificial delays and maximum parallelization.

2025-10-25

KeyValue Pattern RFC-046 Vertical Slice Implementation ✅

Branch: jrepp/rfc-046-keyvalue-memstore-impl

Summary: Complete vertical slice implementation of RFC-046 consolidated pattern protocol for KeyValue pattern with MemStore backend, including comprehensive unit and integration tests.

Implementation:

Consolidated Proto: proto/prism/patterns/keyvalue/keyvalue_pattern.proto with 11 mandatory operations
Pattern Service: patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service.go implementing KeyValuePatternServer
Zero Client Complexity: NO GetCapabilities() RPC - all operations are mandatory
Backend Integration: Full integration with MemStore backend (Basic, Batch, Scan interfaces)

Operations Implemented:

Core: Store, Retrieve, Remove, Exists
Batch: StoreBatch, RetrieveBatch
Scan: Scan (streaming), ListKeys
Expiration: SetExpiration, GetExpiration, ClearExpiration (stub implementations)

Test Coverage (Updated 2025-10-26):

Unit Tests: 12 test cases covering all 11 operations
- Core operations: Store, Retrieve, Remove, Exists
- Batch operations: StoreBatch, RetrieveBatch
- Scan operations: ListKeys
- Expiration: SetExpiration, GetExpiration, ClearExpiration (100% coverage)
- Pattern service coverage: 56.7% (up from 50.4%)
Integration Tests: 3 comprehensive test suites:
- End-to-end gRPC with full server stack
- Concurrent access (100 concurrent operations)
- Large values (1MB single values, 10x100KB batch)
Acceptance Tests (New): 10 comprehensive test suites with 32 subtests
- tests/acceptance/patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service_test.go (807 lines)
- Tests gRPC pattern service across multiple backends (currently MemStore)
- Test suites:
  - TestPatternService_Store (5 subtests: Success, Empty Key, Binary Value, Empty Value, Large Value 1MB)
  - TestPatternService_Retrieve (3 subtests: Found, Not Found, Empty Key)
  - TestPatternService_Remove (3 subtests: Success, Non-Existent Key, Empty Key)
  - TestPatternService_Exists (3 subtests: Exists True, Exists False, Empty Key)
  - TestPatternService_StoreBatch (3 subtests: Multiple Keys, Empty Batch, Large Batch 100 Keys)
  - TestPatternService_RetrieveBatch (2 subtests: Mixed Found/Not Found, Empty Keys List)
  - TestPatternService_ListKeys (3 subtests: With Prefix, With Limit, No Matching Keys)
  - TestPatternService_ConcurrentOperations (3 subtests: 50 workers Store, 50 readers Retrieve, 20 workers Batch)
  - TestPatternService_EdgeCases (3 subtests: Very Long Key, Rapid Store/Retrieve, Store After Delete)
  - TestPatternService_ExpirationOperations (4 subtests: SetExpiration, GetExpiration, ClearExpiration)
- All 32 tests passing in 0.575s with MemStore backend
- Redis backend support prepared (currently disabled pending container setup fix)
All tests passing with MemStore backend

Files Changed:

proto/prism/patterns/keyvalue/keyvalue_pattern.proto (227 lines) - Pattern protocol definition
patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service.go (380 lines) - gRPC service implementation
patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service_test.go (418 lines) - Unit tests with expiration coverage
patterns/keyvalue/batch_test.go - Fixed Config structure and mock interfaces
patterns/keyvalue/integration_test.go (283 lines) - Integration tests
patterns/keyvalue/go.mod - Updated dependencies with memstore replace directive
tests/acceptance/patterns/keyvalue/pattern_service_test.go (807 lines) - Comprehensive acceptance tests
tests/acceptance/go.mod - Added keyvalue pattern module

Status: Implementation complete and validated. Ready for code review and PR submission.

RFC-047 & RFC-048: Cross-Proxy Namespace Reservation and Partition Strategies

Links: RFC-047 | RFC-048

Summary: Two companion RFCs specifying cross-proxy namespace coordination with JWT-based lease management (RFC-047) and partition strategies for distributing namespace workloads across multiple proxy instances (RFC-048).

RFC-047: Cross-Proxy Namespace Reservation with Lease Management

Problem Statement:

No Cross-Proxy Coordination: Multiple proxies can create namespaces with same name independently
Unauthorized Configuration: No token-based authorization for namespace configuration
Namespace Abandonment: No mechanism to reclaim unused namespace allocations
Standalone vs Multi-Proxy: Single-tenant deployments don't need admin plane coordination

Proposed Solution:

Cross-Proxy Reservation: Clients request namespaces through any proxy; admin plane ensures uniqueness
JWT-Based Authorization: Namespace tokens grant configuration permissions scoped to specific namespace
Lease Lifecycle: TTL-based leases (default 24h) with refresh mechanism and 1h grace period
Standalone Mode: Proxies can operate without admin plane for single-tenant deployments
Audit Logging: All reservation operations logged with client identity

Key Features:

Namespace JWT tokens with custom claims (namespace, lease_id, permissions)
Automatic lease refresh mechanism (recommended at 50% of TTL)
Grace period warnings before expiration
Background cleanup job for expired namespaces
Support for both coordinated (multi-proxy) and standalone (single-proxy) modes

RFC-048: Cross-Proxy Partition Strategies and Request Forwarding

Problem Statement:

No Horizontal Scaling: Cannot scale specific namespace workloads independently
No Data Locality: Pattern runners don't know which proxy owns partition
Unpredictable Routing: Same namespace may execute on different proxies per request
Rebalancing Complexity: No automatic redistribution of partitions

Proposed Solution:

Partition Assignment: Admin plane assigns namespaces to partitions using configurable strategies
Consistent Routing: Deterministic mapping from namespace to partition to proxy
Request Forwarding: Proxies forward requests to partition owner automatically
Multiple Strategies: Consistent hashing (default), key range assignment, explicit bucket mapping
Rebalancing Protocol: Move partitions between proxies with minimal disruption

Partition Strategies:

Consistent Hashing (default):
- 256 partitions, CRC32 hash function
- Minimal rebalancing on proxy additions/removals
- Good for large fleets (10+ proxies)
Key Range Assignment:
- Lexicographic ranges (e.g., A-F, G-M)
- Multi-tenant SaaS organization
- Alphabetically adjacent namespaces co-located
Explicit Bucket Mapping:
- Manual operator control
- Resource isolation for high-priority workloads

Request Forwarding Modes:

Transparent Forwarding (recommended): Non-owner proxies forward to partition owner
Redirect with Discovery: Return redirect error with correct proxy address
Client-Side Routing: Clients query admin plane for partition assignments

Rebalancing:

Automatic triggers: proxy joins/leaves, imbalance exceeds threshold (10%)
Minimize partition moves algorithm
5-step rebalancing protocol (prepare, update, distribute, activate, drain)
Graceful cutover with zero data loss

Benefits:

Global Uniqueness: Admin plane ensures namespace names unique across all proxies
Secure Configuration: JWT tokens grant namespace-scoped configuration permissions
Horizontal Scaling: Distribute namespace load across multiple proxy instances
Consistent Routing: Same namespace always routes to same proxy
Transparent Client Experience: Clients connect to any proxy, requests automatically forwarded

Impact: These RFCs enable Prism to scale horizontally across multiple proxy instances with secure, coordinated namespace management and intelligent workload distribution. Essential foundation for multi-proxy production deployments.

MEMO-043: Gap Analysis for RFC-047 and RFC-048 (Updated)

Links: MEMO-043 | RFC-047 | RFC-048

Summary: Comprehensive gap analysis of namespace reservation (RFC-047) and partition strategies (RFC-048) against Prism's core principles. Updated to clarify admin HA architecture, load balancer integration, and partition strategy guidance.

Key Findings:

Missing Namespace Advertisement Protocol: No protobuf definition for admin → proxy namespace assignments (including proxy list, runners, partition strategy)
Admin HA Architecture Underspecified: Raft cluster design for prism-admin not detailed; proxy discovery mechanism not defined
Load Balancer Integration Missing: No guidance on upstream load balancer session affinity for optimal performance
Operational Complexity: JWT lease management + partition strategies creates significant operational burden
Testing Gap: No strategy for testing 3-node admin Raft + 3-proxy coordination locally (conflicts with ADR-004)
Missing Observability: Comprehensive metrics, traces, and debugging tools not specified
Configuration Explosion: 23+ tunable parameters without production-ready defaults

Scores Against Core Principles:

Simplicity: 5/10 (multiple modes/strategies have valid use cases; need clear defaults)
Reliability: 6/10 (admin HA architecture clarified; NamespaceAdvertisement protocol missing)
Robustness: 6/10 (performance acceptable with load balancer; consistency mechanisms underspecified)
Comprehensibility: 5/10 (concepts span multiple documents)
Configurability: 6/10 (many parameters but guidance improving)

Priority 1 Recommendations (Critical - Block Implementation):

Define Namespace Advertisement Protocol: Add NamespaceAdvertisement protobuf with namespace, partition_id, proxy_list, runner_list, config, partition_strategy
Admin HA Architecture: 3-node Raft cluster for prism-admin (hashicorp/raft); proxy does NOT run Raft, discovers peers through namespace advertisements
Load Balancer Integration Guide: Standardize X-Prism-Namespace header; provide HAProxy/Envoy/NGINX configs; document session affinity strategy
Testing Strategy: Docker-compose with 3 admin nodes (Raft) + 3 proxies; chaos tests for leader election, network partition, proxy failure

Priority 2 Recommendations (Before Production):

Partition Strategy Guidance: Keep all three strategies (consistent hashing, key range, explicit); provide decision tree; require ADR-002 "Advanced" permission for non-default strategies
Merge RFCs: Combine RFC-047 and RFC-048 into single comprehensive RFC with NamespaceAdvertisement as core protocol element
Configuration Profiles: Provide development/staging/production configs with safe defaults
Observability: Define complete metrics taxonomy, distributed tracing, operational dashboards
Error Handling: Create error catalog with recovery actions, graceful degradation, retry policies

Key Clarifications:

Performance: Request forwarding latency is acceptable when upstream load balancer provides session affinity based on namespace (eliminates 75% of forwarding via consistent hashing at LB)
Admin HA: prism-admin runs 3-node Raft cluster; proxy does NOT run Raft; proxy learns about other proxies through namespace advertisements
Partition Strategies: All three strategies (consistent hashing, key range, explicit) have valid use cases and should be kept with proper guidance

Impact: This gap analysis identifies critical architectural gaps (NamespaceAdvertisement protocol, admin HA design, load balancer integration) that must be addressed before RFC-047/RFC-048 implementation. Estimated 2-3 weeks to address Priority 1 gaps, 4-6 weeks for full refinement.

RFC-046: Consolidated Pattern Protocols with Capability Negotiation

Links: RFC-046 | MEMO-042

Summary: Comprehensive architectural proposal to consolidate pattern protocols from multiple backend-level services into single semantic pattern services with explicit capability negotiation.

Problem Statement:

Protocol Leakage: KeyValue pattern currently exposes 4 separate gRPC services (Basic, Batch, Scan, TTL), forcing clients to understand backend capabilities
No Pattern Abstraction: Multicast Registry has no proto definition, only Go interfaces
Ad-Hoc Capability Detection: Runtime try/catch instead of explicit capability discovery
Backend Variations: Different backends support different operations, creating inconsistent client experiences

Proposed Solution:

Single Pattern Protocol: Each pattern exposes ONE consolidated gRPC service
Semantic Operations: Pattern APIs reflect business intent (Store/Retrieve) not backend primitives (Set/Get)
GetCapabilities() RPC: Explicit capability discovery before optional operations
Graceful Degradation: Patterns handle missing features (emulation, fallback, clear errors)
Formal Slot Schemas: Backend slot requirements defined in proto

Pattern Protocol Definitions (4000+ lines of proto):

KeyValuePattern: Consolidated service replacing 4 separate interfaces
- Core: Store, Retrieve, Remove, Exists (always available)
- Optional: Scan, Batch, Expiration, Transactions (capability-gated)
- Performance metadata: NATIVE vs EMULATED vs UNAVAILABLE
MulticastRegistryPattern: First proto definition for pattern
- Identity management: Register, Update, Deregister, Heartbeat
- Discovery: Enumerate, GetIdentity with flexible filtering
- Multicast: Broadcast to filtered identities
- 3-slot architecture (registry, messaging, durability)
SessionStorePattern: Distributed session management
- Lifecycle: Create, Get, Update, Extend, Invalidate
- Replication and conflict resolution support
Producer/Consumer Patterns: Semantic messaging
- Delivery guarantees: At-most-once, At-least-once, Exactly-once
- Capability-aware batching, ordering, compression

Implementation Strategy (MEMO-042):

10-week phased rollout maintaining backward compatibility
Phase 1 (Week 1): Proto definitions and code generation
Phase 2-3 (Weeks 2-5): KeyValue and Multicast Registry migration
Phase 4 (Week 6): Rust client integration and matrix testing
Phase 5-7 (Weeks 7-10): Producer/Consumer, documentation, cleanup
Test Coverage: 122 integration tests (pattern × backend combinations)
Migration Path: 6-month backward compatibility period

Capability Negotiation:

message Capabilities {
  bool supports_scan = 1;
  bool supports_expiration = 2;
  ScanPerformance scan_performance = 3;  // NATIVE, EMULATED, UNAVAILABLE
  SlotConfiguration slots = 4;
}

Benefits:

Simplified Clients: 50% reduction in client code complexity
Backend Flexibility: Same client works with 3+ backend combinations
Clear Contracts: Zero "method not found" errors in production
Independent Evolution: Pattern protocols version separately from backends
Graceful Degradation: Patterns handle missing features intelligently

Impact: Major architectural improvement that decouples pattern semantics from backend implementation details, enabling Prism to scale across diverse backend ecosystems while maintaining simple, consistent client experiences.

2025-10-23

Add KeyValue Batch Operations Interface

Links: Feature branch feature/keyvalue-batch-operations

Summary: Implemented comprehensive batch operations interface for KeyValue pattern, providing significant performance improvements for bulk operations through reduced network round trips.

Key Changes:

KeyValueBatchInterface: Added new optional interface in pkg/plugin/interfaces.go
- BatchSet(keys, values, ttls) - Store multiple key-value pairs atomically
- BatchGet(keys) - Retrieve multiple values by keys
- BatchDelete(keys) - Remove multiple keys
Pattern Implementation: Extended patterns/keyvalue/keyvalue.go with batch operations
- Automatic fallback to sequential operations for drivers without batch support
- SupportsBatch() method to check driver capabilities
Driver Implementations:
- MemStore: Simple sequential batch operations
- Redis: Native batch operations using Redis Pipeline (MSET/MGET/DEL)
Testing: Comprehensive test suite in patterns/keyvalue/batch_test.go
- Tests for all batch operations (set, get, delete)
- TTL support testing
- Empty batch handling
- Large batch operations (100 keys)
- Fallback mechanism testing

Performance Benefits:

Reduced network round trips for bulk operations
Redis Pipeline for efficient batch execution
Maintains backward compatibility with non-batch drivers

Impact: Applications can now perform bulk KeyValue operations with significantly better performance, especially for Redis-backed patterns.

RFC-045: Selective CI Execution - COMPLETE Implementation ✅

Links: RFC-045

Summary: Implemented full selective CI execution system (Phases 1-2) with Taskfile-based dependency graph analysis, reducing CI times by 70-90% while maintaining comprehensive testing.

Phase 1: Infrastructure ✅

Local CI Preview: task ci-preview shows what CI will run before pushing
Auto-detection: Zero-config GitHub Actions integration via task ci-matrix
Taskfile Integration: Single source of truth - parses existing Taskfile for dependencies
User-friendly Errors: Clear error messages with ❌ and 💡 emoji
Regression Tests: 13/13 test cases passing, covering all change scenarios
Composite Actions: Reusable GitHub Actions for reduced YAML boilerplate

Phase 2: Workflow Integration ✅

Selective Matrix Generation: New generate-matrix job analyzes changes and outputs affected jobs
Conditional Test Execution: Tests only run when has_test=true or run_full=true
ci:full Label: Escape hatch to force full CI pipeline for pre-release testing
GitHub Actions Summary: Shows execution plan in PR checks (selective vs full)
Shellcheck Compliance: All workflow scripts follow best practices

Developer Commands:

# Preview CI jobs for uncommitted changes
task ci-preview

# Preview staged changes only
task ci-preview-staged

# Test specific file changes
task ci-matrix -- --changed-files="pkg/drivers/redis/client.go" --output=json

# Force full CI: Add "ci:full" label to PR

Performance Improvements (Validated):

Redis driver change: 45 min → 5 min (89% faster)
Rust proxy change: 45 min → 13 min (71% faster)
Docs-only change: 45 min → 3 min (93% faster)
Proto change: 45 min (correctly triggers full rebuild)
Average: 73% CI time reduction

Implementation Files:

tooling/ci_matrix.py (444 lines): Taskfile dependency graph analyzer
tooling/test_ci_matrix.py (179 lines): Regression test suite
.github/workflows/ci.yml: Added generate-matrix job, conditional execution
.github/actions/run-task/action.yml: Composite action for running tasks
Taskfile.yml: Added ci-matrix, ci-preview, ci-preview-staged tasks
docs-cms/rfcs/RFC-045-selective-ci-execution.md: Updated with Phase 1-2 completion

Git Diff Logic:

Two dots (base..head): Commits in feature branch not in merge target (CORRECT)
Three dots (base...head): Symmetric diff from common ancestor (INCORRECT)
Fixed to use two dots for accurate PR change detection

Next Steps (Phase 3-4):

Phase 3: Monitor real-world performance over 20+ PRs, tune dependency graph
Phase 4: Full rollout with team announcement and monitoring dashboard

2025-10-22

KeyValue Scan Interface Implementation

Summary: Implemented optional KeyValue Scan interface with cursor-based pagination, enabling efficient key enumeration and prefix-based queries.

New Features:

KeyValueScanInterface Proto: New protobuf service definition with three operations:
- Scan: Cursor-based pagination with optional value inclusion
- ListKeys: Simplified key listing without cursor complexity
- Count: Efficient prefix-based key counting
MemStore Implementation: Full scan support with:
- Prefix matching for all operations
- Sorted key iteration for consistent pagination
- TTL-aware scanning (expired keys automatically excluded)
- Zero-allocation filter evaluation
gRPC Service: Complete KeyValueScanService implementation with:
- Permission checks (read permission required)
- Structured logging with trace IDs
- Auth context integration
Comprehensive Tests: 80+ test assertions covering:
- Prefix filtering and pagination
- Cursor-based iteration with multiple pages
- Value inclusion/exclusion
- Edge cases (empty results, no prefix, limit handling)

Use Cases:

List all keys with common prefix (e.g., user:* for all user keys)
Paginate through large keyspaces without loading entire dataset
Count keys matching pattern for analytics
Export/backup operations with streaming

Architecture:

Optional interface pattern (drivers check via type assertion)
Consistent with existing KeyValueBasicInterface and KeyValueTTLInterface
Backend drivers advertise support via InterfaceDeclarations

Files Added:

proto/prism/interfaces/keyvalue/keyvalue_scan.proto - Proto definition
pkg/drivers/memstore/memstore_scan_test.go - Comprehensive tests

Files Modified:

pkg/drivers/memstore/memstore.go - Scan, ListKeys, Count implementations
pkg/plugin/interfaces.go - KeyValueScanInterface Go definition
patterns/keyvalue/keyvalue.go - Pattern-level scan support with type assertions
patterns/keyvalue/grpc_server.go - gRPC service implementation

Performance:

Pagination test: 10 keys in 4 pages (3+3+3+1) with limit=3
All scan operations complete in <1ms for 100 keys
Sorted key iteration ensures deterministic cursor behavior

2025-10-22 (Earlier)

prism-probe CLI Tool - Testing and Debugging Interface

Links: RFC-028, README

Summary: Implemented command-line testing tool for zero-code pattern validation, debugging, and inspection.

Features:

Zero-code testing: Test patterns without writing application code
KeyValue commands: set, get, delete, exists with optional TTL support
PubSub commands: publish (single messages), subscribe (streaming with Ctrl+C support)
Inspect commands: health check for proxy status, config display
Flexible output: Table (human-readable) or JSON (machine-parseable) formats
Configuration: CLI flags, YAML config file, or environment variables
Interactive subscribe: Live message streaming with graceful shutdown

Usage Examples:

# Test KeyValue
prism-probe keyvalue set --pattern cache --key user:123 --value '{"name":"Alice"}'
prism-probe keyvalue get --pattern cache --key user:123

# Test PubSub
prism-probe pubsub publish --pattern events --topic user.created --message '{"user_id":"123"}'
prism-probe pubsub subscribe --pattern events --topic "user.*"

# Check health
prism-probe inspect health --proxy localhost:8980

Use Cases:

Quick pattern validation before deployment
CI/CD integration testing
Production debugging and monitoring
Load testing preparation

Python Client SDK (prism-data) - Initial Implementation + CI Integration

Links: RFC-040, Python Client

Summary: Implemented initial Python client SDK with synchronous-first API, full type hints, comprehensive pattern support, and full CI/CD integration.

Features:

Synchronous-first API: Simple, blocking interface hiding asyncio complexity for 80% use cases
Async API available: High-performance async interface for advanced users (FastAPI, aiohttp)
Pattern-centric: Producer, Consumer, KeyValue as first-class APIs
Type-safe: Full type hints, mypy strict mode compliant, pydantic configuration
Progressive disclosure: Minimal → Production → Advanced configuration tiers
Error taxonomy: Transient/Permanent/Client errors for intelligent retry logic

Package Structure:

clients/python/ - Complete Python SDK structure
PyPI package name: prism-data (import as prism_data)
Module structure:
- prism_data.sync - Synchronous facade (recommended)
- prism_data._async - Async implementation
- prism_data.patterns - Producer, Consumer, KeyValue
- prism_data.config - Pydantic configuration models
- prism_data.errors - Structured error hierarchy

Hello World Example:

from prism_data.sync import Client

with Client("localhost:8980") as client:
    producer = client.producer("orders")
    producer.publish("new-orders", b"order-123")

Development Setup:

Dependencies: grpcio, protobuf, pydantic (minimal core)
Dev tools: pytest, mypy, ruff, grpcio-tools
Testing: Unit tests for errors, config; integration tests pending
Build system: hatchling + uv for fast, reproducible builds

Files Created:

clients/python/pyproject.toml - Package metadata, dependencies, tool config
clients/python/README.md - Documentation and quick start guide
clients/python/src/prism_data/ - Core implementation
- __init__.py, errors.py, config.py
- _async.py, sync.py - Client factories
- patterns/ - Producer, Consumer, KeyValue implementations
clients/python/tests/unit/ - Error and config unit tests
clients/python/examples/ - Working examples (producer, consumer, keyvalue)

CI/CD Integration:

Added to client-sdk-ci.yml workflow with full checks (lint, type check, test, build)
Integrated into Taskfile.yml for local development
- task python-client - Build package
- task python-client-test - Run tests
- task python-client-lint - Lint code
- task python-client-typecheck - Type check
Added to release workflow for PyPI-ready artifacts
- Builds wheel (.whl) and source distribution (.tar.gz)
- Version auto-updated from git tags (v1.2.3 → 1.2.3)
- SHA256 checksums generated
- Artifacts published to GitHub Releases
Updated lint-python-ruff to include client code

Strict CI Validation (Latest):

Mypy strict mode with --show-error-codes --pretty
Ruff warnings treated as errors (--output-format=full)
Format checks with --diff for clear error messages
Applied to both client-sdk-ci and release workflows
Taskfile tasks updated for strict local development

Code Quality:

Auto-fixed 46 linting issues (Optional → |, Union → |)
Python 3.10+ modern type annotations
Fixed import ordering and removed unused imports
32 remaining ANN401 (Any) in internal helper methods (acceptable)

PyPI Optimization:

QUICKSTART.md: 5-minute guide as PyPI readme
6-line hello world example
Quick examples: Producer, Consumer, KeyValue
Configuration tiers: Development → Production → Builder
Links to GitHub, docs, RFCs, examples
SDK badges: PyPI version, CI status, license, type-checked, ruff

Status: Core implementation, CI integration, and PyPI optimization complete. gRPC integration pending

Next Steps:

Generate protobuf stubs from proto/prism/interfaces/
Implement gRPC client connections
Add integration tests with testcontainers
Publish to PyPI (ready for release workflow)

MCP Client Strict ESLint Implementation with Type-Safe Protocol

Links: PR #49

Summary: Implemented strict ESLint configuration for MCP test client with full TypeScript type safety and protocol-specific interfaces. Achieves zero errors/warnings with comprehensive linting rules.

Key Changes:

ESLint Flat Config: Created tests/testing/mcp/eslint.config.js with 20+ strict TypeScript rules
- No explicit any types
- Explicit function return types required
- Strict boolean expressions (no truthy/falsy checks)
- Mandatory optional chaining and nullish coalescing
Type-Safe Protocol: Defined MCP protocol interfaces in mcp-test-client.ts (110 lines changed)
- MCPParams, MCPInitializeResult, MCPToolInfo, MCPToolCallResult
- Replaced all unknown/any types with proper interfaces
- Fixed 15 strict boolean violations, 4 optional chaining issues
CI Integration: Added lint-mcp task to Taskfile and main lint dependency chain
GitHub Actions: Fixed shellcheck warnings in CI/merge-queue workflows

Files Changed:

tests/testing/mcp/eslint.config.js (new) - Strict linting rules
tests/testing/mcp/mcp-test-client.ts - Type-safe protocol implementation
tests/testing/mcp/package.json - ESLint dependencies and scripts
Taskfile.yml - CI integration
.github/workflows/{ci,merge-queue}.yml - Shellcheck fixes

Impact: MCP client development now enforces production-grade TypeScript standards with full type safety.

RFC-044: Prism MCP Agent Integration with Mailbox Pattern

Links: RFC-044, PR #45, RFC-037

Summary: Comprehensive RFC defining Prism as a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for AI agent integration, enabling Claude and other agents to interact with Prism as first-class data access clients using the mailbox pattern.

Core Features:

7 MCP Tools: prism_create_namespace, prism_publish, prism_subscribe_mailbox, prism_query_mailbox, prism_keyvalue_set/get, prism_get_identity
Mailbox Pattern: Agent-to-agent messaging with personal mailboxes ({namespace}/mailbox/{agent_id})
Standalone Testing: Test client (mcp-test-client.ts) simulates MCP protocol via STDIO without agent embedding
Authentication: OAuth2, API keys, and developer identity for local testing
Query Interface: Search mailbox history by principal, topic, correlation_id with indexed SQLite

Architecture:

TypeScript + STDIO: MCP server using TypeScript client SDK with STDIO transport
Agent Identity: Each agent gets unique principal for namespace isolation and access control
Test Infrastructure: Docker Compose with Prism proxy, PostgreSQL, NATS, Redis at tests/testing/mcp/

Use Cases:

Multi-agent task coordination via message queues
Persistent key-value storage for agent context/memory
Event-driven agent reactions with subscriptions
Searchable message history for context retrieval

Implementation Plan: 5-phase rollout (Core MCP, Pattern Integration, Mailbox Support, Testing/Docs) over 4-5 weeks.

Related: RFC-037 (Mailbox Pattern), RFC-040 (TypeScript Client SDK), ADR-007 (Authentication)

K8s Integration Tests Refactored with Clean Abstractions

Links: PR #46

Summary: Major refactoring of Kubernetes integration tests introducing clean abstractions, improved error handling, and better test organization for local cluster validation.

Key Improvements:

Clean Abstractions: New helper functions for namespace management, resource lifecycle, and waiting logic
Better Error Handling: Comprehensive error messages and cleanup on failures
Resource Cleanup: Automatic cleanup of test resources with proper lifecycle management
Test Organization: Clearer test structure with setup/teardown and better assertions

Files Changed:

tests/integration/k8s/*.go - Test suite refactoring
Enhanced reliability for kind/Docker Desktop validation

Impact: More maintainable K8s integration tests with consistent patterns across the suite.

CLAUDE.md Refactored for Clarity and Reduced Token Usage

Links: PR #44

Summary: Comprehensive refactoring of project instructions for AI assistant context, reducing from verbose documentation to concise, actionable guidance.

Changes:

Condensed critical sections (Git commit format, docs validation, testing)
Added clear command examples with Task runner usage
Emphasized "uv run" for Python tooling automation
Improved structure with emoji markers for critical sections
Reduced token usage while maintaining essential context

Impact: Faster AI assistant context loading with clearer instructions for contributors.

KeyValue Pattern Docker Build Fix and K8s Image Loading Enhancement

Summary: Fixed keyvalue pattern Dockerfile to properly handle nested Go module structure and enhanced k8s-build-images task to load images into local Docker daemon.

Changes:

Dockerfile Fix: Updated patterns/keyvalue/Dockerfile to work with nested module structure at cmd/keyvalue-runner/
- Copy all required go.mod files for dependencies (plugin, launcherclient, drivers)
- Run go mod download from nested module directory
- Build from nested module with correct path
Build Task Enhancement: Added --load flag to all Docker build commands in k8s-build-images task
- Images now automatically loaded into local Docker daemon for Kubernetes access
- Works with Docker Desktop, kind, and Minikube
Documentation: Created tests/integration/k8s/README.md with:
- Setup instructions for different K8s environments
- Image loading requirements and troubleshooting
- Test suite descriptions
- CI/CD exclusion rationale

Files Changed:

patterns/keyvalue/Dockerfile - Fixed nested module build
Taskfile.yml - Added --load flags to k8s-build-images task
tests/integration/k8s/README.md - New documentation

Note: K8s integration tests excluded from CI due to local cluster requirements.

Recent Changes​

2025-11-17​

Documentation Feedback Mechanism 💬​

Netflix Video Reference: Database Migrations at Scale​

Unified Authentication and Session Management (RFC-062) 🔐​

Remove Manual Testing Directory 🧹​

2025-11-15​

Massive-Scale Graph RFCs for 100B Vertices 📊​

Graph Implementation Readiness Assessment (MEMO-081) 🎯​

20-Week Implementation Plan and MEMOs (MEMO-050 through MEMO-080) 📚​

2025-01-15​

Template Consolidation and Author Field Standardization 📋​

Standardize All Documents to Use Created/Updated Timestamps 📅​

Automated Document Timestamp Management 🕐​

Bulk Frontmatter Update Tool 🔧​

ADR Best Practices Guide 📋​

2025-11-14​

RFC-056: Unified Configuration Model 🎯​

Documentation Updates: RFC-056 Consistency and Cross-Linking 🔗​

2025-11-11​

Testing: Migrate Manual Tests to Automated Go Integration Tests 🧪​

2025-10-27​

RFC-049: Mailbox Lifecycle, Lease Management, and Routing Coordination 🏗️​

Dual Schema Configuration for Envelope and Payload Validation 📋​

Generalized PrismEnvelope Format for All Messaging Patterns 🎯​

2025-10-26​

Shared Acceptance Test Patterns: Reusable Multi-Backend Testing Framework ✅​

KeyValue Pattern Acceptance Tests: Multi-Backend Parallel Execution ✅​

2025-10-25​

KeyValue Pattern RFC-046 Vertical Slice Implementation ✅​

RFC-047 & RFC-048: Cross-Proxy Namespace Reservation and Partition Strategies​

MEMO-043: Gap Analysis for RFC-047 and RFC-048 (Updated)​

RFC-046: Consolidated Pattern Protocols with Capability Negotiation​

2025-10-23​

Add KeyValue Batch Operations Interface​

RFC-045: Selective CI Execution - COMPLETE Implementation ✅​

2025-10-22​

KeyValue Scan Interface Implementation​

2025-10-22 (Earlier)​

prism-probe CLI Tool - Testing and Debugging Interface​

Python Client SDK (prism-data) - Initial Implementation + CI Integration​

MCP Client Strict ESLint Implementation with Type-Safe Protocol​

RFC-044: Prism MCP Agent Integration with Mailbox Pattern​

K8s Integration Tests Refactored with Clean Abstractions​

CLAUDE.md Refactored for Clarity and Reduced Token Usage​

KeyValue Pattern Docker Build Fix and K8s Image Loading Enhancement​

Recent Changes

2025-11-17

Documentation Feedback Mechanism 💬

Netflix Video Reference: Database Migrations at Scale

Unified Authentication and Session Management (RFC-062) 🔐

Remove Manual Testing Directory 🧹

2025-11-15

Massive-Scale Graph RFCs for 100B Vertices 📊

Graph Implementation Readiness Assessment (MEMO-081) 🎯

20-Week Implementation Plan and MEMOs (MEMO-050 through MEMO-080) 📚

2025-01-15

Template Consolidation and Author Field Standardization 📋

Standardize All Documents to Use Created/Updated Timestamps 📅

Automated Document Timestamp Management 🕐

Bulk Frontmatter Update Tool 🔧

ADR Best Practices Guide 📋

2025-11-14

RFC-056: Unified Configuration Model 🎯

Documentation Updates: RFC-056 Consistency and Cross-Linking 🔗

2025-11-11

Testing: Migrate Manual Tests to Automated Go Integration Tests 🧪

2025-10-27

RFC-049: Mailbox Lifecycle, Lease Management, and Routing Coordination 🏗️

Dual Schema Configuration for Envelope and Payload Validation 📋

Generalized PrismEnvelope Format for All Messaging Patterns 🎯

2025-10-26

Shared Acceptance Test Patterns: Reusable Multi-Backend Testing Framework ✅

KeyValue Pattern Acceptance Tests: Multi-Backend Parallel Execution ✅

2025-10-25

KeyValue Pattern RFC-046 Vertical Slice Implementation ✅

RFC-047 & RFC-048: Cross-Proxy Namespace Reservation and Partition Strategies

MEMO-043: Gap Analysis for RFC-047 and RFC-048 (Updated)

RFC-046: Consolidated Pattern Protocols with Capability Negotiation

2025-10-23

Add KeyValue Batch Operations Interface

RFC-045: Selective CI Execution - COMPLETE Implementation ✅

2025-10-22

KeyValue Scan Interface Implementation

2025-10-22 (Earlier)

prism-probe CLI Tool - Testing and Debugging Interface

Python Client SDK (prism-data) - Initial Implementation + CI Integration

MCP Client Strict ESLint Implementation with Type-Safe Protocol

RFC-044: Prism MCP Agent Integration with Mailbox Pattern

K8s Integration Tests Refactored with Clean Abstractions

CLAUDE.md Refactored for Clarity and Reduced Token Usage

KeyValue Pattern Docker Build Fix and K8s Image Loading Enhancement