Files
StarPunk/docs/decisions/ADR-053-performance-monitoring-strategy.md
Phil Skentelbery e589f5bd6c docs: Fix ADR numbering conflicts and create comprehensive documentation indices
This commit resolves all documentation issues identified in the comprehensive review:

CRITICAL FIXES:
- Renumbered duplicate ADRs to eliminate conflicts:
  * ADR-022-migration-race-condition-fix → ADR-037
  * ADR-022-syndication-formats → ADR-038
  * ADR-023-microformats2-compliance → ADR-040
  * ADR-027-versioning-strategy-for-authorization-removal → ADR-042
  * ADR-030-CORRECTED-indieauth-endpoint-discovery → ADR-043
  * ADR-031-endpoint-discovery-implementation → ADR-044

- Updated all cross-references to renumbered ADRs in:
  * docs/projectplan/ROADMAP.md
  * docs/reports/v1.0.0-rc.5-migration-race-condition-implementation.md
  * docs/reports/2025-11-24-endpoint-discovery-analysis.md
  * docs/decisions/ADR-043-CORRECTED-indieauth-endpoint-discovery.md
  * docs/decisions/ADR-044-endpoint-discovery-implementation.md

- Updated README.md version from 1.0.0 to 1.1.0
- Tracked ADR-021-indieauth-provider-strategy.md in git

DOCUMENTATION IMPROVEMENTS:
- Created comprehensive INDEX.md files for all docs/ subdirectories:
  * docs/architecture/INDEX.md (28 documents indexed)
  * docs/decisions/INDEX.md (55 ADRs indexed with topical grouping)
  * docs/design/INDEX.md (phase plans and feature designs)
  * docs/standards/INDEX.md (9 standards with compliance checklist)
  * docs/reports/INDEX.md (57 implementation reports)
  * docs/deployment/INDEX.md (deployment guides)
  * docs/examples/INDEX.md (code samples and usage patterns)
  * docs/migration/INDEX.md (version migration guides)
  * docs/releases/INDEX.md (release documentation)
  * docs/reviews/INDEX.md (architectural reviews)
  * docs/security/INDEX.md (security documentation)

- Updated CLAUDE.md with complete folder descriptions including:
  * docs/migration/
  * docs/releases/
  * docs/security/

VERIFICATION:
- All ADR numbers now sequential and unique (50 total ADRs)
- No duplicate ADR numbers remain
- All cross-references updated and verified
- Documentation structure consistent and well-organized

These changes improve documentation discoverability, maintainability, and
ensure proper version tracking. All index files follow consistent format
with clear navigation guidance.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-11-25 13:28:56 -07:00

304 lines
7.2 KiB
Markdown

# ADR-053: Performance Monitoring Strategy
## Status
Accepted
## Context
StarPunk v1.1.1 introduces performance monitoring to help operators understand system behavior in production. Currently, we have no visibility into:
- Database query performance
- Memory usage patterns
- Request processing times
- Bottlenecks and slow operations
We need a lightweight, zero-dependency monitoring solution that provides actionable insights without impacting performance.
## Decision
Implement a built-in performance monitoring system using Python's standard library, with optional detailed tracking controlled by configuration.
### Architecture Overview
```
Request → Middleware (timing) → Handler
↓ ↓
Context Manager Decorators
↓ ↓
Metrics Store ← Database Hooks
Admin Dashboard
```
### Core Components
#### 1. Metrics Collector
Location: `starpunk/monitoring/collector.py`
Responsibilities:
- Collect timing data
- Track memory usage
- Store recent metrics in memory
- Provide aggregation functions
Data Structure:
```python
@dataclass
class Metric:
timestamp: float
category: str # "db", "http", "function"
operation: str # specific operation name
duration: float # in seconds
metadata: dict # additional context
```
#### 2. Database Performance Tracking
Location: `starpunk/monitoring/db_monitor.py`
Features:
- Query execution timing
- Slow query detection
- Query pattern analysis
- Connection pool monitoring
Implementation via SQLite callbacks:
```python
# Wrap database operations
with monitor.track_query("SELECT", "notes"):
cursor.execute(query)
```
#### 3. Memory Tracking
Location: `starpunk/monitoring/memory.py`
Track:
- Process memory (RSS)
- Memory growth over time
- Per-request memory delta
- Memory high water mark
Uses `resource` module (stdlib).
#### 4. Request Performance
Location: `starpunk/monitoring/http.py`
Track:
- Request processing time
- Response size
- Status code distribution
- Slowest endpoints
#### 5. Admin Dashboard
Location: `/admin/performance`
Display:
- Real-time metrics (last 15 minutes)
- Slow query log
- Memory usage graph
- Endpoint performance table
- Database statistics
### Data Retention
In-memory circular buffer approach:
- Last 1000 metrics retained
- Automatic old data eviction
- No persistent storage (privacy/simplicity)
- Reset on restart
### Performance Overhead
Target: <1% overhead when enabled
Strategies:
- Sampling for high-frequency operations
- Lazy computation of aggregates
- Minimal memory footprint (1MB max)
- Conditional compilation via config
## Rationale
### Why Built-in Monitoring?
1. **Zero Dependencies**: Uses only Python stdlib
2. **Privacy**: No external services
3. **Simplicity**: No complex setup
4. **Integrated**: Direct access to internals
5. **Lightweight**: Minimal overhead
### Why Not External Tools?
**Prometheus/Grafana**:
- Requires external services
- Complex setup
- Overkill for single-user system
**APM Services** (New Relic, DataDog):
- Privacy concerns
- Subscription costs
- Network dependency
- Too heavy for our needs
**OpenTelemetry**:
- Large dependency
- Complex configuration
- Designed for distributed systems
### Design Principles
1. **Opt-in**: Disabled by default
2. **Lightweight**: Minimal resource usage
3. **Actionable**: Focus on useful metrics
4. **Temporary**: No permanent storage
5. **Private**: No external data transmission
## Consequences
### Positive
1. **Production Visibility**: Understand behavior under load
2. **Performance Debugging**: Identify bottlenecks quickly
3. **No Dependencies**: Pure Python solution
4. **Privacy Preserving**: Data stays local
5. **Simple Deployment**: No additional services
### Negative
1. **Limited History**: Only recent data available
2. **Memory Usage**: ~1MB for metrics buffer
3. **No Alerting**: Manual monitoring required
4. **Single Node**: No distributed tracing
### Mitigations
1. Export capability for external tools
2. Configurable buffer size
3. Webhook support for alerts (future)
4. Focus on most valuable metrics
## Alternatives Considered
### 1. Logging-based Monitoring
**Approach**: Parse performance data from logs
**Pros**: Simple, no new code
**Cons**: Log parsing complexity, no real-time view
**Decision**: Dedicated monitoring is cleaner
### 2. External Monitoring Service
**Approach**: Use service like Sentry
**Pros**: Full-featured, alerting included
**Cons**: Privacy, cost, complexity
**Decision**: Violates self-hosted principle
### 3. Prometheus Exporter
**Approach**: Expose /metrics endpoint
**Pros**: Standard, good tooling
**Cons**: Requires Prometheus setup
**Decision**: Too complex for target users
### 4. No Monitoring
**Approach**: Rely on logs and external tools
**Pros**: Simplest
**Cons**: Poor production visibility
**Decision**: v1.1.1 specifically targets production readiness
## Implementation Details
### Instrumentation Points
1. **Database Layer**
- All queries automatically timed
- Connection acquisition/release
- Transaction duration
- Migration execution
2. **HTTP Layer**
- Middleware wraps all requests
- Per-endpoint timing
- Static file serving
- Error handling
3. **Core Functions**
- Note creation/update
- Search operations
- RSS generation
- Authentication flow
### Performance Dashboard Layout
```
Performance Dashboard
═══════════════════
Overview
--------
Uptime: 5d 3h 15m
Requests: 10,234
Avg Response: 45ms
Memory: 128MB
Slow Queries (>1s)
------------------
[timestamp] SELECT ... FROM notes (1.2s)
[timestamp] UPDATE ... SET ... (1.1s)
Endpoint Performance
-------------------
GET / : avg 23ms, p99 45ms
GET /notes/:id : avg 35ms, p99 67ms
POST /micropub : avg 125ms, p99 234ms
Memory Usage
-----------
[ASCII graph showing last 15 minutes]
Database Stats
-------------
Pool Size: 3/5
Queries/sec: 4.2
Cache Hit Rate: 87%
```
### Configuration Options
```python
# All under STARPUNK_PERF_* prefix
MONITORING_ENABLED = False # Master switch
SLOW_QUERY_THRESHOLD = 1.0 # seconds
LOG_QUERIES = False # Log all queries
MEMORY_TRACKING = False # Track memory usage
SAMPLE_RATE = 1.0 # 1.0 = all, 0.1 = 10%
BUFFER_SIZE = 1000 # Number of metrics
DASHBOARD_ENABLED = True # Enable web UI
```
## Testing Strategy
1. **Unit Tests**: Mock collectors, verify metrics
2. **Integration Tests**: End-to-end monitoring flow
3. **Performance Tests**: Verify low overhead
4. **Load Tests**: Behavior under stress
## Security Considerations
1. Dashboard requires admin authentication
2. No sensitive data in metrics
3. No external data transmission
4. Metrics cleared on logout
5. Rate limiting on dashboard endpoint
## Migration Path
No migration required - monitoring is opt-in via configuration.
## Future Enhancements
v1.2.0 and beyond:
- Metric export (CSV/JSON)
- Alert thresholds
- Historical trending
- Custom metric points
- Plugin architecture
## References
- [Python resource module](https://docs.python.org/3/library/resource.html)
- [SQLite Query Performance](https://www.sqlite.org/queryplanner.html)
- [Web Vitals](https://web.dev/vitals/)
## Document History
- 2025-11-25: Initial draft for v1.1.1 release planning